Lawrence Cedarhurst Bank v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Lawrence Cedarhurst Bank v. City of New York

261 A.D. 1089, 26 N.Y.S.2d 994, 1941 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8910

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

DecidedApril 14, 1941

StatusPublished

This text of 261 A.D. 1089 (Lawrence Cedarhurst Bank v. City of New York) 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

Lawrence Cedarhurst Bank v. City of New York, 261 A.D. 1089, 26 N.Y.S.2d 994, 1941 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8910 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1941).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action for a declaratory judgment decreeing that the boundary line of the city of New York is the east and north bounds of the former village of Far Roekaway, as set forth in section 1 of chapter 1 of the Greater New York Charter, as amended, and that part of plaintiff’s premises is in Nassau county [1090]*1090and part in Queens county, and adjudging that the liens of the city of New York for unpaid taxes and assessments are illegal and void and canceling them, and for other incidental relief, judgment in favor of plaintiff unanimously affirmed, with costs to plaintiff-respondent, and one bill of costs to town of Hempstead and county of Nassau. Order striking out the second, third and fourth separate and distinct defenses and the first, second and third partial defenses of the appellant, City of New York, unanimously affirmed, without costs. No opinion. Present — Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Johnston, Taylor and Close, JJ.

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

In an action for a declaratory judgment decreeing that the boundary line of the city of New York is the east and north bounds of the former village of Far Roekaway, as set forth in section 1 of chapter 1 of the Greater New York Charter, as amended, and that part of plaintiff’s premises is in Nassau county [1090]*1090and part in Queens county, and adjudging that the liens of the city of New York for unpaid taxes and assessments are illegal and void and canceling them, and for other incidental relief, judgment in favor of plaintiff unanimously affirmed, with costs to plaintiff-respondent, and one bill of costs to town of Hempstead and county of Nassau. Order striking out the second, third and fourth separate and distinct defenses and the first, second and third partial defenses of the appellant, City of New York, unanimously affirmed, without costs. No opinion. Present — Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Johnston, Taylor and Close, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

261 A.D. 1089, 26 N.Y.S.2d 994, 1941 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8910, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lawrence-cedarhurst-bank-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-1941.