Brooks v. Dinnerstein

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Brooks v. Dinnerstein

247 A.D. 848

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedMarch 15, 1936

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 247 A.D. 848 (Brooks v. Dinnerstein) 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

Brooks v. Dinnerstein, 247 A.D. 848 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1936).

Pincite

Opinion

Action to foreclose a mechanic’s lien. The notice of lien states that “ Max Brooks and Isaac Brooks, copartners, doing business as M. Brooks & Son, reside in the town of Rockland, Sullivan County, New York.” This statement is sufficiently descriptive of the residence and place of business of the lienors. Judgment reversed on the law and facts, and new trial granted, with costs to the appellants to abide the event. The court reverses finding of fact numbered sixth. Hill, P. J., Rhodes, McNamee, Crapser and Bliss, JJ., concur.

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

Action to foreclose a mechanic’s lien. The notice of lien states that “ Max Brooks and Isaac Brooks, copartners, doing business as M. Brooks & Son, reside in the town of Rockland, Sullivan County, New York.” This statement is sufficiently descriptive of the residence and place of business of the lienors. Judgment reversed on the law and facts, and new trial granted, with costs to the appellants to abide the event. The court reverses finding of fact numbered sixth. Hill, P. J., Rhodes, McNamee, Crapser and Bliss, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

247 A.D. 848, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brooks-v-dinnerstein-nyappdiv-1936.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack