Hiatrides v. Tobler

59 A.D.2d 924, 399 N.Y.S.2d 259, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14138
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided November 21, 1977·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

In an action, inter alia, on a promissory note, defendants appeal, as limited by their briéf, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated June 23, 1977, as granted plaintiff-respondent’s motion for the appointment' of a temporary receiver pursuant to CPLR 6401. Order affirmed, insofar as appealed from, with $50 costs and disbursements. Special Term did not abuse its discretion in appointing the receiver (see 7A Weinstein-Korn-Miller, NY Civ Prac, par 6401.05). The appointment of the receiver with the supervision of the court, upon advance notice and opportunity to be heard, and the requirement of the posting of a bond, did not deny defendant due process of law (see Mitchell v W. T. Grant Co., 416 US 600). Gulotta, P. J., Hopkins, Latham and Mollen, JJ., concur.

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

Hiatrides v. Tobler, 59 A.D.2d 924, 399 N.Y.S.2d 259, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14138 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1977).

59 A.D.2d 924 (Hiatrides v. Tobler) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

HSBC Bank USA, N.A. v. Rubin
210 A.D.3d 73 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2022)