Burgess Bros. v. Stewart
This text of 194 A.D. 913 (Burgess Bros. v. Stewart) 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.
Opinion
Without passing upon the merits of the controversy and following the usual policy of this court on appeals from orders granting injunctions pendente lite, we think that the issues presented by the pleadings should be heard and determined at a trial, and that we should not attempt to decide them upon affidavits. It appears that the case has been reached upon the calendar, and trial may be had immediately. It is only where, accepting plaintiff’s version of the facts so far as there is dispute respecting the same, it seems clear that he is not entitled to the relief sought, [914]*914that the court will interfere with the discretion exercised at Special Term. (Greene v. Faber, 158 App. Div. 149.) That was the situation presented in the Reardon cases,
Reardon, Inc., v. Caton (189 App. Div. 501); Reardon v. International Mercantile Marine Co. (Id. 515).— Rep.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
194 A.D. 913, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/burgess-bros-v-stewart-nyappdiv-1920.