In re Goldstick

183 A.D.2d 684
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided May 28, 1992·Published·Cited by 7 cases

Opinion

— Motion for reargument or leave to appeal to Court of Appeals denied; cross-motion to relieve counsel and for related relief, for reargument or leave to appeal to Court of Appeals denied.

Motion by petitioner-appellant-respondent Florence Levine granted solely to the extent of remanding to the Surrogate’s Court the matter of the forfeiture of Florence Levine’s commission as viewed separately from the matter of the commissions of David Goldstick, as indicated.

Motion by petitioner-appellant-respondent David T. Gold-stick for reargument granted and, upon reargument, the above-described decision and order [177 AD2d 225] is modified to the extent of directing Minnie Lee Tananbaum to return to the subject trusts all of the proceeds of the sale of such property, as indicated. Concur — Carro, J. P., Milonas, Ellerin, Wallach and Ross, JJ.

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

In re Goldstick, 183 A.D.2d 684 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

183 A.D.2d 684 (In re Goldstick) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

In re Lasdon
105 A.D.3d 499 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2013)
In Re the Judicial Settlement of the Intermediate Account of HSBC Bank USA, N.A.
96 A.D.3d 1655 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)
In re Estate of Witherill
37 A.D.3d 879 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2007)
In re the Estate of Gerster
284 A.D.2d 131 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2001)
Zimmerman v. Pokart
242 A.D.2d 202 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1997)
Bogoni v. Friedlander
197 A.D.2d 281 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1994)