In re Klemtenowsky

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Klemtenowsky

230 A.D. 730

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

DecidedJune 15, 1930

StatusPublished

This text of 230 A.D. 730 (In re Klemtenowsky) 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 Klemtenowsky, 230 A.D. 730 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1930).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal dismissed, without costs. The surety company is not a party aggrieved. The Special Term was unwarranted in excluding this surety company from becoming surety on the bond to be filed in the absence of facts showing its disqualification. Furthermore, the surety should not have been relieved of its liability without an accounting or other proper disposition relieving it. Undoubtedly on application by the committee, the court at Special Term will vacate the order and give appropriate relief. Lazansky, P. J., Rich, Young, Hagarty and Carswell, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal dismissed, without costs. The surety company is not a party aggrieved. The Special Term was unwarranted in excluding this surety company from becoming surety on the bond to be filed in the absence of facts showing its disqualification. Furthermore, the surety should not have been relieved of its liability without an accounting or other proper disposition relieving it. Undoubtedly on application by the committee, the court at Special Term will vacate the order and give appropriate relief. Lazansky, P. J., Rich, Young, Hagarty and Carswell, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

230 A.D. 730, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-klemtenowsky-nyappdiv-1930.