In re Kaufman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Kaufman

251 A.D. 862, 298 N.Y.S. 498, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8000

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

DecidedJune 25, 1937

StatusPublished

This text of 251 A.D. 862 (In re Kaufman) 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 Kaufman, 251 A.D. 862, 298 N.Y.S. 498, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8000 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1937).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding instituted by the appellants, trustees, under a plan of reorganization for Series B-l of mortgage investments of the New York Title and Mortgage Company, for an order directing the owner-respondent to pay surplus income to the trustees in reduction of the principal of the underlying first mortgage covering real estate of the owner: order denying application without prejudice to renewal affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. In thus affirming the court does not pass on or approve the “ management expense ” charged by the owner-respondent but leaves that question in abeyance, to be determined on a future accounting. Hagarty, Carswell, Davis, Adel and Taylor, JJ., concur.

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

In a proceeding instituted by the appellants, trustees, under a plan of reorganization for Series B-l of mortgage investments of the New York Title and Mortgage Company, for an order directing the owner-respondent to pay surplus income to the trustees in reduction of the principal of the underlying first mortgage covering real estate of the owner: order denying application without prejudice to renewal affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. In thus affirming the court does not pass on or approve the “ management expense ” charged by the owner-respondent but leaves that question in abeyance, to be determined on a future accounting. Hagarty, Carswell, Davis, Adel and Taylor, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

251 A.D. 862, 298 N.Y.S. 498, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8000, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-kaufman-nyappdiv-1937.