Butler v. Butler

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Butler v. Butler

17 A.D.2d 996, 1962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7119

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

DecidedNovember 15, 1962

StatusPublished

This text of 17 A.D.2d 996 (Butler v. Butler) 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

Butler v. Butler, 17 A.D.2d 996, 1962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7119 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1962).

Pincite

Opinion

Stay of order appointing receiver granted on the following conditions: (a) That defendant-appellant perfect the appeal and file and serve in mimeographed or printed form record and brief on or before November 26, and be ready for argument during the week of December 3; (b) that defendant-appellant consent to the payment of $1,000 to plaintiff-respondent from the funds on deposit in the State of New York National Bank conditioned also upon payment of an equal sum to defendant-appellant; (e) that defendant-appellant file an undertaking of $10,000. The conditions imposed in granting the stay are not to be deemed a ruling on the merits of any part of the controversy. Bergan, P. J., Coon, Herlihy, Reynolds and Taylor, JJ., concur.

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

Stay of order appointing receiver granted on the following conditions: (a) That defendant-appellant perfect the appeal and file and serve in mimeographed or printed form record and brief on or before November 26, and be ready for argument during the week of December 3; (b) that defendant-appellant consent to the payment of $1,000 to plaintiff-respondent from the funds on deposit in the State of New York National Bank conditioned also upon payment of an equal sum to defendant-appellant; (e) that defendant-appellant file an undertaking of $10,000. The conditions imposed in granting the stay are not to be deemed a ruling on the merits of any part of the controversy. Bergan, P. J., Coon, Herlihy, Reynolds and Taylor, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

17 A.D.2d 996, 1962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7119, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/butler-v-butler-nyappdiv-1962.