Krisher v. Hogan

New York State Court of Claims

Krisher v. Hogan

23 Misc. 2d 110, 203 N.Y.S.2d 537, 1960 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2619

DecidedAugust 3, 1960

StatusPublished

This text of 23 Misc. 2d 110 (Krisher v. Hogan) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Claims primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Krisher v. Hogan, 23 Misc. 2d 110, 203 N.Y.S.2d 537, 1960 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2619 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1960).

Pincite

Opinion

Sidney Squire, J.

Claimant’s motion for judgment against the defendant in the sum of $1,000,000 plus costs of $1,402.42 for “ Photostatic C'opies ” is denied because it is not in accordance with the practice in this court. No claim has been filed. The named defendant, “ Frank Hogan, District Attorney, New York County ’ ’, is not a proper defendant in this court of limited jurisdiction. Short-form order signed.

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

Sidney Squire, J.

Claimant’s motion for judgment against the defendant in the sum of $1,000,000 plus costs of $1,402.42 for “ Photostatic C'opies ” is denied because it is not in accordance with the practice in this court. No claim has been filed. The named defendant, “ Frank Hogan, District Attorney, New York County ’ ’, is not a proper defendant in this court of limited jurisdiction. Short-form order signed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

23 Misc. 2d 110, 203 N.Y.S.2d 537, 1960 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2619, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/krisher-v-hogan-nyclaimsct-1960.