Ginsburg v. F. W. Woolworth Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Ginsburg v. F. W. Woolworth Co.

176 A.D. 881

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

DecidedDecember 15, 1916

StatusPublished

This text of 176 A.D. 881 (Ginsburg v. F. W. Woolworth 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

Ginsburg v. F. W. Woolworth Co., 176 A.D. 881 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1916).

Pincite

Opinion

Our settled practice on appeals from orders has been not to review the discretion exercised by the court at Special Term in granting or in withholding an injunction pendente lite. (Duryea v. Auerbach, 164 App. Div. 44; Smith v. Smith, 170 id. 950.) No exceptional case to call for a departure from this rule has been made out. Order affirmed, but without passing on the merits, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. Thomas, Stapleton, Rich and Putnam, JJ., concurred.

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

Our settled practice on appeals from orders has been not to review the discretion exercised by the court at Special Term in granting or in withholding an injunction pendente lite. (Duryea v. Auerbach, 164 App. Div. 44; Smith v. Smith, 170 id. 950.) No exceptional case to call for a departure from this rule has been made out. Order affirmed, but without passing on the merits, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. Thomas, Stapleton, Rich and Putnam, JJ., concurred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

176 A.D. 881, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ginsburg-v-f-w-woolworth-co-nyappdiv-1916.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack