Frummer v. Greenberg

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Frummer v. Greenberg

285 A.D. 888, 137 N.Y.S.2d 377, 1955 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6013

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

DecidedFebruary 7, 1955

StatusPublished

This text of 285 A.D. 888 (Frummer v. Greenberg) 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

Frummer v. Greenberg, 285 A.D. 888, 137 N.Y.S.2d 377, 1955 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6013 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1955).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment for plaintiff and from an order denying a motion for a new trial in an action brought by a trustee in bankruptcy to be declared the owner of certain realty, and for other relief. Judgment and order unanimously affirmed, with costs to plaintiff-respondent. There was ample evidence before the trial court upon which to base a finding that this real estate belonged to appellant Esther Greenberg, the bankrupt, and as such became an asset of the estate of said bankrupt. There is also no ground for vacating the judgment and granting a new trial on the basis of the appellants’ contention as to what the understanding of all the parties may have been in addition to the terms of the stipulation as placed upon the record by the court reporter. Present — Nolan, P. J., Wenzel, MacCrate, Schmidt and Murphy, JJ. [See post, p. 960.]

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

Appeal from a judgment for plaintiff and from an order denying a motion for a new trial in an action brought by a trustee in bankruptcy to be declared the owner of certain realty, and for other relief. Judgment and order unanimously affirmed, with costs to plaintiff-respondent. There was ample evidence before the trial court upon which to base a finding that this real estate belonged to appellant Esther Greenberg, the bankrupt, and as such became an asset of the estate of said bankrupt. There is also no ground for vacating the judgment and granting a new trial on the basis of the appellants’ contention as to what the understanding of all the parties may have been in addition to the terms of the stipulation as placed upon the record by the court reporter. Present — Nolan, P. J., Wenzel, MacCrate, Schmidt and Murphy, JJ. [See post, p. 960.]

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

285 A.D. 888, 137 N.Y.S.2d 377, 1955 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6013, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/frummer-v-greenberg-nyappdiv-1955.