Horovitz v. Louis Fagnant, Inc.

201 A.D. 856

This text of 201 A.D. 856 (Horovitz v. Louis Fagnant, Inc.) 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
Horovitz v. Louis Fagnant, Inc., 201 A.D. 856 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1922).

Opinion

Order reversed with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion to vacate the previous order denied, with ten dollars costs. Upon delivery of the deed by the referee in foreclosure to the purchasers they became entitled to possession of the premises. (Kilpatrick v. Argyle Co., Inc., 199 App. Div. 753. See, also, section 1675 of the Code, now section 985 of the Civil Practice Act; sections 1632 and 1671 of the Code, now sections 1085 and 121 of the Civil Practice Act.) Blackmar, P. J., Kelly, Jaycox, Manning and Kelby, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Kilpatrick v. Argyle Co.
199 A.D. 753 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1922)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
201 A.D. 856, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/horovitz-v-louis-fagnant-inc-nyappdiv-1922.