Finkelstein v. B. C. K. Realty Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Finkelstein v. B. C. K. Realty Corp.

237 A.D. 904

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

DecidedJanuary 15, 1933

DocketAppeal No. 1; Appeal No. 2

StatusPublished

This text of 237 A.D. 904 (Finkelstein v. B. C. K. Realty 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

Finkelstein v. B. C. K. Realty Corp., 237 A.D. 904 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1933).

Pincite

Opinion

Order of April 29, 1931, order of February 9, 1932, resettling said order, and judgment of May 22, 1931, unanimously affirmed, without costs. The second amended complaint in substance and in legal effect is identical with the first amended complaint. The first amended complaint was held to be insufficient in law by an order made February 27, 1931, and entered March 12, 1931, from which no appeal was taken. Accordingly, the sufficiency of the second amended complaint is res adjudicata and the question may not be reviewed on an appeal from an order dismissing the second amended complaint. Nor may the question be urged on the appeal from the judgment since the notices of appeal from the judgment do not bring up for review the order of March 12, 1931. Young, Kapper, Hagarty, Carswell and Tompkins, JJ., concur.

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

Order of April 29, 1931, order of February 9, 1932, resettling said order, and judgment of May 22, 1931, unanimously affirmed, without costs. The second amended complaint in substance and in legal effect is identical with the first amended complaint. The first amended complaint was held to be insufficient in law by an order made February 27, 1931, and entered March 12, 1931, from which no appeal was taken. Accordingly, the sufficiency of the second amended complaint is res adjudicata and the question may not be reviewed on an appeal from an order dismissing the second amended complaint. Nor may the question be urged on the appeal from the judgment since the notices of appeal from the judgment do not bring up for review the order of March 12, 1931. Young, Kapper, Hagarty, Carswell and Tompkins, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

237 A.D. 904, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/finkelstein-v-b-c-k-realty-corp-nyappdiv-1933.