Fromm v. Herbert Silk Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Fromm v. Herbert Silk Co.

246 A.D. 537

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

DecidedOctober 15, 1935

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 246 A.D. 537 (Fromm v. Herbert Silk Co.) 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

Fromm v. Herbert Silk Co., 246 A.D. 537 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1935).

Pincite

Opinion

Order denying motion of defendant Herbert Silk Co., Inc., to strike the case

from the calendar of preferred causes reversed on the law, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion granted. The plaintiff, not having been a resident of Kings county at the time that the alleged cause of action arose or at the present time, is not entitled to a preference under rule 6 of the Calendar Rules of Kings County. Lazansky, P. J., Scudder, Tompkins, Davis and Johnston, JJ., concur. See ante, p. 534.]

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

Order denying motion of defendant Herbert Silk Co., Inc., to strike the case

from the calendar of preferred causes reversed on the law, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion granted. The plaintiff, not having been a resident of Kings county at the time that the alleged cause of action arose or at the present time, is not entitled to a preference under rule 6 of the Calendar Rules of Kings County. Lazansky, P. J., Scudder, Tompkins, Davis and Johnston, JJ., concur. See ante, p. 534.]

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

246 A.D. 537, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fromm-v-herbert-silk-co-nyappdiv-1935.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack