Finkelstein v. Special Term of Supreme Court

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Finkelstein v. Special Term of Supreme Court

262 A.D. 1007, 30 N.Y.S.2d 840, 1941 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6990

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

DecidedOctober 17, 1941

StatusPublished

This text of 262 A.D. 1007 (Finkelstein v. Special Term of Supreme Court) 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. Special Term of Supreme Court, 262 A.D. 1007, 30 N.Y.S.2d 840, 1941 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6990 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1941).

Pincite

Opinion

Motion denied. The responsibility for a just settlement is in the first instance on the justice at Special Term. We must assume, as did the judge in the United States District Court, who denied petitioner’s application for an injunction, that the justice at Special Term will not “ do something which in equity and good conscience ought not to be done.” Present — Martin, P. J., O’Malley, Townley, Dore and Cohn, JJ.

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

Motion denied. The responsibility for a just settlement is in the first instance on the justice at Special Term. We must assume, as did the judge in the United States District Court, who denied petitioner’s application for an injunction, that the justice at Special Term will not “ do something which in equity and good conscience ought not to be done.” Present — Martin, P. J., O’Malley, Townley, Dore and Cohn, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

262 A.D. 1007, 30 N.Y.S.2d 840, 1941 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6990, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/finkelstein-v-special-term-of-supreme-court-nyappdiv-1941.