La Froscia v. Tudda

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

La Froscia v. Tudda

240 A.D. 977

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

DecidedDecember 15, 1933

StatusPublished

This text of 240 A.D. 977 (La Froscia v. Tudda) 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

La Froscia v. Tudda, 240 A.D. 977 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1933).

Pincite

Opinion

Order vacating sale of property and directing a resale reversed on the law and the facts, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion denied, with ten dollars costs. In eur opinion, there was proof of proper service of a sufficient notice of sale upon the respondent’s attorney, and there is no proof that the property was bid in by plaintiffs for an inadequate price or that the respondent is prepared or intends to bid on the proposed resale. Lazansky, P. J., Young, Kapper, Carswell and Tompkins, JJ., concur.

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

Order vacating sale of property and directing a resale reversed on the law and the facts, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion denied, with ten dollars costs. In eur opinion, there was proof of proper service of a sufficient notice of sale upon the respondent’s attorney, and there is no proof that the property was bid in by plaintiffs for an inadequate price or that the respondent is prepared or intends to bid on the proposed resale. Lazansky, P. J., Young, Kapper, Carswell and Tompkins, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

240 A.D. 977, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/la-froscia-v-tudda-nyappdiv-1933.