Garfield v. Equitable Life Assurance Society of United States

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Garfield v. Equitable Life Assurance Society of United States

9 A.D.2d 625, 193 N.Y.S.2d 675, 1959 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7006

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

DecidedSeptember 30, 1959

StatusPublished

This text of 9 A.D.2d 625 (Garfield v. Equitable Life Assurance Society of United States) 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

Garfield v. Equitable Life Assurance Society of United States, 9 A.D.2d 625, 193 N.Y.S.2d 675, 1959 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7006 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1959).

Pincite

Opinion

This motion [No. 95] brought on by order to show cause dated July 10, 1959 requests relief by reason of the death of one of the defendants-respondents. The application made under section 578 of the Civil Practice Act is premature and is denied without prejudice to renewal on compliance with said section. An order however may be made to bring in the proper representative of the decedent when it is necessary so to do for the proper disposition of the matter (Civ. Prac. Act, § 85). Counsel’s attention is called to the fact that Gustave B. Garfield, Esq., is stated to be the attorney of record for plaintiff-appellant pursuant to indorsement on the legal back in Motion No. 95, while Charles Trynin, Esq., is stated to be the attorney of record for plaintiff-appellant in the same cause in Motion No. 135. Concur — Rabin, J. P., M. M. Frank, Valente, McNally and Stevens, JJ.

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

This motion [No. 95] brought on by order to show cause dated July 10, 1959 requests relief by reason of the death of one of the defendants-respondents. The application made under section 578 of the Civil Practice Act is premature and is denied without prejudice to renewal on compliance with said section. An order however may be made to bring in the proper representative of the decedent when it is necessary so to do for the proper disposition of the matter (Civ. Prac. Act, § 85). Counsel’s attention is called to the fact that Gustave B. Garfield, Esq., is stated to be the attorney of record for plaintiff-appellant pursuant to indorsement on the legal back in Motion No. 95, while Charles Trynin, Esq., is stated to be the attorney of record for plaintiff-appellant in the same cause in Motion No. 135. Concur — Rabin, J. P., M. M. Frank, Valente, McNally and Stevens, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

9 A.D.2d 625, 193 N.Y.S.2d 675, 1959 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7006, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/garfield-v-equitable-life-assurance-society-of-united-states-nyappdiv-1959.