Bourak Contracting Co. v. Dayton

242 A.D. 649, 272 N.Y.S. 432
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJune 15, 1934
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 242 A.D. 649 (Bourak Contracting Co. v. Dayton) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Bourak Contracting Co. v. Dayton, 242 A.D. 649, 272 N.Y.S. 432 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1934).

Opinion

Order modified by striking therefrom all provisions settling or referring to the defendant’s account and all requirements as to notice to the persons therein [650]*650named, and also by striking therefrom the provisions construing the agreement of agency, and, as so modified, affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements to the appellant. In our opinion the provisions of the order settling the defendant’s account and requiring notice to the persons therein named and also construing the agency agreement were manifestly improper. No such relief can be awarded to the defendant except after a trial and pursuant to a judgment. Lazansky, P. J., Young, Kapper, Tompkins and Davis, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Nishman v. De Marco
76 A.D.2d 360 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1980)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
242 A.D. 649, 272 N.Y.S. 432, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bourak-contracting-co-v-dayton-nyappdiv-1934.