In re Blumenthal

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Blumenthal

169 A.D. 918

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

DecidedJune 15, 1915

DocketAppeal No. 2; Appeal No. 3; Appeal No. 4

StatusPublished

This text of 169 A.D. 918 (In re Blumenthal) 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

In re Blumenthal, 169 A.D. 918 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1915).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam:

As direct issues of fact are presented upon the moving and answering, and replying affidavits, the direction for the issuance of a-peremptory writ of mandamus was error. ■ The orders appealed- from are,therefore, reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, the motions [919]*919for a peremptory writ denied, and alternative writs granted. Present — Ingraham, P. J., McLaughlin, Laughlin Clarke and Scott, JJ. Orders reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motions denied, and alternative writs of mandamus granted.

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

Per Curiam:

As direct issues of fact are presented upon the moving and answering, and replying affidavits, the direction for the issuance of a-peremptory writ of mandamus was error. ■ The orders appealed- from are,therefore, reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, the motions [919]*919for a peremptory writ denied, and alternative writs granted. Present — Ingraham, P. J., McLaughlin, Laughlin Clarke and Scott, JJ. Orders reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motions denied, and alternative writs of mandamus granted.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

169 A.D. 918, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-blumenthal-nyappdiv-1915.