Jiffy Auto Laundry, Inc. v. Morris Rosenberg & Son, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Jiffy Auto Laundry, Inc. v. Morris Rosenberg & Son, Inc.

10 A.D.2d 733, 201 N.Y.S.2d 492, 1960 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10928

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

DecidedMarch 28, 1960

StatusPublished

This text of 10 A.D.2d 733 (Jiffy Auto Laundry, Inc. v. Morris Rosenberg & Son, Inc.) 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

Jiffy Auto Laundry, Inc. v. Morris Rosenberg & Son, Inc., 10 A.D.2d 733, 201 N.Y.S.2d 492, 1960 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10928 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1960).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for breach of a stipulation of settlement of both an action at law and a summary proceeding to recover possession of real property pending in the Municipal Court of the City of New York at the time of the stipulation, the.appeal is from an order denying appellants’ motion for judgment on the pleadings dismissing the complaint (Rules Civ. Prac., rule 112). The motion was made on the complaint, the answer, the demand for a bill of particulars, and the bill of particulars furnished in response thereto. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. No opinion. Beldoek, Acting P. J., Kleinfeld, Christ, Pette and Brennan, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to recover damages for breach of a stipulation of settlement of both an action at law and a summary proceeding to recover possession of real property pending in the Municipal Court of the City of New York at the time of the stipulation, the.appeal is from an order denying appellants’ motion for judgment on the pleadings dismissing the complaint (Rules Civ. Prac., rule 112). The motion was made on the complaint, the answer, the demand for a bill of particulars, and the bill of particulars furnished in response thereto. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. No opinion. Beldoek, Acting P. J., Kleinfeld, Christ, Pette and Brennan, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

10 A.D.2d 733, 201 N.Y.S.2d 492, 1960 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10928, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jiffy-auto-laundry-inc-v-morris-rosenberg-son-inc-nyappdiv-1960.