Goldstein v. Wright

264 A.D. 836, 35 N.Y.S.2d 753, 1942 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4933

This text of 264 A.D. 836 (Goldstein v. Wright) 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
Goldstein v. Wright, 264 A.D. 836, 35 N.Y.S.2d 753, 1942 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4933 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1942).

Opinion

Order, so far as appealed from, unanimously reversed, without costs, and items 2 and 3 of the demand for a biE of particulars aEowed as modified herein: 2. An itemized statement of the services rendered by plaintiff to the copartnership of Wright & Sexton as aEeged in paragraph “ seventh ” of the complaint. 3. An itemized statement of services rendered by plaintiff to said George S. Simpson individually^ in contradistinction [837]*837to services rendered to the copartnership. Verified bill of particulars to be served within fifteen days after service of order. No opinion. Present — Martin, P. J., Townley, Glennon, Untermyer and Dore, JJ.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
264 A.D. 836, 35 N.Y.S.2d 753, 1942 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4933, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/goldstein-v-wright-nyappdiv-1942.