In re Wright

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Wright

238 A.D. 754

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

DecidedJanuary 15, 1933

StatusPublished

This text of 238 A.D. 754 (In re Wright) 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 Wright, 238 A.D. 754 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1933).

Pincite

Opinion

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. All concur, except Bliss, J., who dissents, in part with a memorandum. Bliss, J. (dissenting). I concur in the affirmance of that portion of the order appealed from which denies the motion to quash the writ. I dissent from the affirmance of and vote to reverse that portion of the order which appoints a referee to take evidence, on the ground that the appointment of a referee before the return has been filed is premature. (Tax Law, § 293.)

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

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. All concur, except Bliss, J., who dissents, in part with a memorandum. Bliss, J. (dissenting). I concur in the affirmance of that portion of the order appealed from which denies the motion to quash the writ. I dissent from the affirmance of and vote to reverse that portion of the order which appoints a referee to take evidence, on the ground that the appointment of a referee before the return has been filed is premature. (Tax Law, § 293.)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

238 A.D. 754, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-wright-nyappdiv-1933.