Heller v. Pierce

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Heller v. Pierce

47 A.D.2d 668, 366 N.Y.S.2d 861, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8873

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

DecidedFebruary 24, 1975

StatusPublished

This text of 47 A.D.2d 668 (Heller v. Pierce) 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

Heller v. Pierce, 47 A.D.2d 668, 366 N.Y.S.2d 861, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8873 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by defendant from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated October 31, 1974, which inter alla granted plaintiff summary judgment in the sum of $5,494.04. At a conference in this court held on February 13, 1975 the respective attorneys for plaintiff and defendant entered into a written stipulation settling the action. In accordance with the stipulation, the order appealed from is reversed, but, if defendant defaults in any payment set forth in the stipulation, and if the default continue after 10 days’ notice by plaintiff to defendant, the order may be re-entered for the balance due, with interest thereon. Gulotta, P. J., Rabin, Hopkins, Martuscello and Benjamin, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by defendant from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated October 31, 1974, which inter alla granted plaintiff summary judgment in the sum of $5,494.04. At a conference in this court held on February 13, 1975 the respective attorneys for plaintiff and defendant entered into a written stipulation settling the action. In accordance with the stipulation, the order appealed from is reversed, but, if defendant defaults in any payment set forth in the stipulation, and if the default continue after 10 days’ notice by plaintiff to defendant, the order may be re-entered for the balance due, with interest thereon. Gulotta, P. J., Rabin, Hopkins, Martuscello and Benjamin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

47 A.D.2d 668, 366 N.Y.S.2d 861, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8873, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/heller-v-pierce-nyappdiv-1975.