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

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided October 17, 1941·Published

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.

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

262 A.D. 1007 (Finkelstein v. Special Term of Supreme Court) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.