Home/New York Court of Appeals/Litchhult v. Reiss

Litchhult v. Reiss

610 N.E.2d 381, 81 N.Y.2d 737, 594 N.Y.S.2d 708, 1992 N.Y. LEXIS 4393
CourtNew York Court of Appeals
DecidedDecember 16, 1992
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 610 N.E.2d 381 (Litchhult v. Reiss) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Litchhult v. Reiss, 610 N.E.2d 381, 81 N.Y.2d 737, 594 N.Y.S.2d 708, 1992 N.Y. LEXIS 4393 (N.Y. 1992).

Opinion

Motion by plaintiff Litchhult for leave to appeal dismissed for failure to demonstrate timeliness as required by section 500.11 (d) (1) (iii) of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.11 [d] [1] [iii]). Motion by defendant Valley Cen[738]*738tral School District for leave to appeal denied. Motion by plaintiffs Flanagan and Soltis for leave to appeal denied.

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

Related

Japan Airlines Company, Ltd., Plaintiff-Appellee-Cross-Appellant v. Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, Defendant-Appellant-Cross-Appellee
178 F.3d 103 (Second Circuit, 1999)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
610 N.E.2d 381, 81 N.Y.2d 737, 594 N.Y.S.2d 708, 1992 N.Y. LEXIS 4393, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/litchhult-v-reiss-ny-1992.