Kew Arms, Inc. v. Fleischman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Kew Arms, Inc. v. Fleischman

240 A.D. 768

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

DecidedJuly 15, 1933

StatusPublished

This text of 240 A.D. 768 (Kew Arms, Inc. v. Fleischman) 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

Kew Arms, Inc. v. Fleischman, 240 A.D. 768 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1933).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, so far as appealed from by defendant The Manhattan Savings Institution, reversed on the law and the facts, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion granted, with ten dollars costs, the bill of particulars to be served within ten days from the entry of the order herein. Order, so far as appealed from by plaintiff, affirmed. In our opinion, the defendant, appellant, was entitled to the information sought as to the precise character of plaintiff’s claim, including the names of the persons who held the outstanding paramount title alleged in the complaint. Although the complaint alleges that plaintiff asserts no personal claim against the defendant, appellant, the latter is entitled to defend its mortgage interest and lien in the property and to assert title thereto in the mortgagor. Lazansky, P. J., Young, Scudder, Tompkins and Davis, JJ., concur.

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

Order, so far as appealed from by defendant The Manhattan Savings Institution, reversed on the law and the facts, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion granted, with ten dollars costs, the bill of particulars to be served within ten days from the entry of the order herein. Order, so far as appealed from by plaintiff, affirmed. In our opinion, the defendant, appellant, was entitled to the information sought as to the precise character of plaintiff’s claim, including the names of the persons who held the outstanding paramount title alleged in the complaint. Although the complaint alleges that plaintiff asserts no personal claim against the defendant, appellant, the latter is entitled to defend its mortgage interest and lien in the property and to assert title thereto in the mortgagor. Lazansky, P. J., Young, Scudder, Tompkins and Davis, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

240 A.D. 768, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kew-arms-inc-v-fleischman-nyappdiv-1933.