Bush v. Brand

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Bush v. Brand

52 A.D.2d 932, 383 N.Y.S.2d 645, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12796

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

DecidedMay 24, 1976

StatusPublished

This text of 52 A.D.2d 932 (Bush v. Brand) 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

Bush v. Brand, 52 A.D.2d 932, 383 N.Y.S.2d 645, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12796 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for malpractice by attorneys, plaintiffs appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, entered October 7, 1975, which is in favor of defendants upon the trial court’s dismissal of the complaint at the close of the plaintiffs’ case, at a jury trial. Defendant-respondent Irving Brand died after the taking of this appeal. It has been stipulated by and between the attorneys for the parties that the said death "will in no way be an impediment to the determination * * * of the issues submitted on the appeal.” Judgment affirmed, with costs. In our opinion, Trial Term properly determined that plaintiffs had failed to [933]*933establish a prima facie case (see, generally, McAleenan v Massachusetts Bonding & Ins. Co., 232 NY 199; Vooth v McEachen, 181 NY 28). Cohalan, Acting P. J., Margett, Damiani, Rabin and Titone, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to recover damages for malpractice by attorneys, plaintiffs appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, entered October 7, 1975, which is in favor of defendants upon the trial court’s dismissal of the complaint at the close of the plaintiffs’ case, at a jury trial. Defendant-respondent Irving Brand died after the taking of this appeal. It has been stipulated by and between the attorneys for the parties that the said death "will in no way be an impediment to the determination * * * of the issues submitted on the appeal.” Judgment affirmed, with costs. In our opinion, Trial Term properly determined that plaintiffs had failed to [933]*933establish a prima facie case (see, generally, McAleenan v Massachusetts Bonding & Ins. Co., 232 NY 199; Vooth v McEachen, 181 NY 28). Cohalan, Acting P. J., Margett, Damiani, Rabin and Titone, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

52 A.D.2d 932, 383 N.Y.S.2d 645, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12796, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bush-v-brand-nyappdiv-1976.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack