Friedman v. Halpern

269 A.D. 984, 58 N.Y.S.2d 254, 1945 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4909
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided November 5, 1945·No. Appeal No. 2·Published

Opinion

In an action to restrain the violation of a covenant against engaging in certain business in a specified area, plaintiff appeals from an order granting defendants’ motion to preclude, unless a bill of particulars in compliance with an earlier order therefor be served within twenty days. Appeal dismissed as academic, with $10 costs and disbursements to respondents, as it appears that a bill of particulars in compliance with the order of preclusion was served by plaintiff prior to his taking the appeal therefrom. Close, P. J., Hagarty, Cars-well, Johnston and Lewis, JJ., concur.

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

Friedman v. Halpern, 269 A.D. 984, 58 N.Y.S.2d 254, 1945 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4909 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1945).

269 A.D. 984 (Friedman v. Halpern) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.