Duffy v. Hill

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Duffy v. Hill

42 A.D.2d 774, 346 N.Y.S.2d 760, 1973 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3694

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

DecidedJuly 30, 1973

StatusPublished

This text of 42 A.D.2d 774 (Duffy v. Hill) 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

Duffy v. Hill, 42 A.D.2d 774, 346 N.Y.S.2d 760, 1973 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3694 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1973).

Pincite

Opinion

Order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated February 27, 1973, modified by striking from the first decretal paragraph the words “ in all respects ” and by substituting therefor, so that it will follow the words that the motion of plaintiff in Action No. 2 is “ denied ”, the following " except that it is granted to the extent that the defendant trustees in Action No. 2 are directed to disclose to said plaintiff the extent of the unpaid obligations incurred by the Pension and Retirement Benefit Fund in the construction of improvements on the premises, specifying the identity of and the amount claimed by each creditor ”. As so modified, order affirmed, without costs. In our opinion, plaintiff Colonie Hill, Ltd. is entitled to disclosure with respect to the Fund’s unpaid obligations at this stage of the proceedings. Munder, Acting P. J., Martuscello, Shapiro, Christ and Brennan, JJ., concur.

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

Order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated February 27, 1973, modified by striking from the first decretal paragraph the words “ in all respects ” and by substituting therefor, so that it will follow the words that the motion of plaintiff in Action No. 2 is “ denied ”, the following " except that it is granted to the extent that the defendant trustees in Action No. 2 are directed to disclose to said plaintiff the extent of the unpaid obligations incurred by the Pension and Retirement Benefit Fund in the construction of improvements on the premises, specifying the identity of and the amount claimed by each creditor ”. As so modified, order affirmed, without costs. In our opinion, plaintiff Colonie Hill, Ltd. is entitled to disclosure with respect to the Fund’s unpaid obligations at this stage of the proceedings. Munder, Acting P. J., Martuscello, Shapiro, Christ and Brennan, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

42 A.D.2d 774, 346 N.Y.S.2d 760, 1973 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3694, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/duffy-v-hill-nyappdiv-1973.