Gitter v. Schiff

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Gitter v. Schiff

10 A.D.2d 974, 201 N.Y.S.2d 824, 1960 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10031

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided May 16, 1960·Published

Opinion

In an action to declare certain transactions usurious and void, and for other incidental relief, the plaintiff appeals: (1) from an order of the Supreme Count, Kings County, dated January 18, 1960, directing her to serve an amended complaint separately stating and numbering the causes of action alleged in her present complaint (Rules Civ. Prac., rule 90); and (2) from the decision on which said order was entered. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. No opinion. Appeal from decision dismissed, without costs. No appeal lies from a decision (Smith v. D’Esposito, 249 App. Div. 649). Nolan, P. J., Beldock, Ughetta, Pette and Brennan, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to declare certain transactions usurious and void, and for other incidental relief, the plaintiff appeals: (1) from an order of the Supreme Count, Kings County, dated January 18, 1960, directing her to serve an amended complaint separately stating and numbering the causes of action alleged in her present complaint (Rules Civ. Prac., rule 90); and (2) from the decision on which said order was entered. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. No opinion. Appeal from decision dismissed, without costs. No appeal lies from a decision (Smith v. D’Esposito, 249 App. Div. 649). Nolan, P. J., Beldock, Ughetta, Pette and Brennan, JJ., concur.

Gitter v. Schiff, 10 A.D.2d 974, 201 N.Y.S.2d 824, 1960 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10031 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1960).

Pincite

10 A.D.2d 974 (Gitter v. Schiff) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related