Clemente v. Unexcelled Chemical Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Clemente v. Unexcelled Chemical Corp.

11 A.D.2d 1046, 206 N.Y.S.2d 248, 1960 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7745

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

DecidedOctober 17, 1960

StatusPublished

This text of 11 A.D.2d 1046 (Clemente v. Unexcelled Chemical Corp.) 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

Clemente v. Unexcelled Chemical Corp., 11 A.D.2d 1046, 206 N.Y.S.2d 248, 1960 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7745 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1960).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for breach of contract and for other relief, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated August 8, 1960, which denies its motion to resettle a prior order of said court, entered July 5, 1960, so as to change certain of its decretal provisions. Appeal dismissed, without costs. An order denying resettlement of a prior order so as to change its decretal provisions, is not appealable (Matter of Krawchick [Goldman], 3 A D 2d 678; Matter of Rubino V. Empire Heating Gorp., 2 A D 2d 988; Ambassador Realty Go. v. Nieolay, 1 A D 2d 972; Bergin v. Anderson, 216 App. Div. 844 ; 8 CarmodyWait, New York Practice, pp. 521-522; ef. Place v. Hayward, 100 N. Y. 626). Beldoek, Acting P. J., Ughetta, Kleinfeld, Christ and Brennan, 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 breach of contract and for other relief, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated August 8, 1960, which denies its motion to resettle a prior order of said court, entered July 5, 1960, so as to change certain of its decretal provisions. Appeal dismissed, without costs. An order denying resettlement of a prior order so as to change its decretal provisions, is not appealable (Matter of Krawchick [Goldman], 3 A D 2d 678; Matter of Rubino V. Empire Heating Gorp., 2 A D 2d 988; Ambassador Realty Go. v. Nieolay, 1 A D 2d 972; Bergin v. Anderson, 216 App. Div. 844 ; 8 CarmodyWait, New York Practice, pp. 521-522; ef. Place v. Hayward, 100 N. Y. 626). Beldoek, Acting P. J., Ughetta, Kleinfeld, Christ and Brennan, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

11 A.D.2d 1046, 206 N.Y.S.2d 248, 1960 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7745, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/clemente-v-unexcelled-chemical-corp-nyappdiv-1960.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack