Edelman v. Arcola Realty Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Edelman v. Arcola Realty Corp.

228 A.D. 847

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided March 15, 1930·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Order denying plaintiffs’ motion to direct the clerk to advance the case upon the calendar reversed upon the law and the facts, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, motion granted, with ten dollars costs, and the clerk directed to place the case on the day calendar for March 31, 1930. The record herein discloses that the action is upon a contract and that plaintiffs have complied with all the requirements of rule 10 of Queens County Supreme Court Trial Term Rules, adopted pursuant to section 83 of the Judiciary Law, thus entitling them to the advancement of the case upon the calendar. (Williams v. Tompkins, Inc., 209 App. Div. 546.) Lazansky, P. J., Young, Carswell, Scudder and Tompkins, JJ., concur.

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

Order denying plaintiffs’ motion to direct the clerk to advance the case upon the calendar reversed upon the law and the facts, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, motion granted, with ten dollars costs, and the clerk directed to place the case on the day calendar for March 31, 1930. The record herein discloses that the action is upon a contract and that plaintiffs have complied with all the requirements of rule 10 of Queens County Supreme Court Trial Term Rules, adopted pursuant to section 83 of the Judiciary Law, thus entitling them to the advancement of the case upon the calendar. (Williams v. Tompkins, Inc., 209 App. Div. 546.) Lazansky, P. J., Young, Carswell, Scudder and Tompkins, JJ., concur.

Edelman v. Arcola Realty Corp., 228 A.D. 847 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1930).

Pincite

228 A.D. 847 (Edelman v. Arcola Realty Corp.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related