In re Bloom
42 A.D.2d 841, 1973 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3680
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided August 2, 1973·Published·Cited by 8 cases
Opinion
Motion for enlargement of time denied, and the appeal dismissed, sua sponte, on the ground that the appeal was improper and that the proper procedure is review under CPLR article 78 (Judiciary Law, § 755). Order filed. Concur — Stevens, P. J., Markewich, Kupferman, Murphy and Tilzer, JJ:
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
In re Bloom, 42 A.D.2d 841, 1973 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3680 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1973).
42 A.D.2d 841 (In re Bloom) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Hertz Corp. v. Attorney-General of New York
136 Misc. 2d 420 (New York Supreme Court, 1987)
Business Foods Service, Inc. v. Food Concepts Corp.
533 F. Supp. 992 (E.D. New York, 1982)
Arlinghaus v. Ritenour
622 F.2d 629 (Second Circuit, 1980)
Cronk v. State
100 Misc. 2d 680 (New York State Court of Claims, 1979)
Optivision, Inc. v. Syracuse Shopping Center Associates
472 F. Supp. 665 (N.D. New York, 1979)
Bernard v. Kuha
90 Misc. 2d 148 (New York County Courts, 1977)
Brooklyn Union Gas Co. v. Jimeniz
82 Misc. 2d 948 (Civil Court of the City of New York, 1975)