Mateyka v. Reischmann

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Mateyka v. Reischmann

264 A.D. 752, 34 N.Y.S.2d 617

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided May 8, 1942·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

We interpret the interlocutory judgment to mean that on tli accounting plaintiff is entitled to one-third of the assets of the partnership afta crediting each partner with the amount of such partner’s capital contribution! As so interpreted, we think the judgment is correct.

The judgment should be affirmed, without costs.

Present — Martin, P. J., Untermyer, Dore, Cohn and Callahan, JJ.

Judgment unanimously affirmed, without costs.

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

Per Curiam.

We interpret the interlocutory judgment to mean that on tli accounting plaintiff is entitled to one-third of the assets of the partnership afta crediting each partner with the amount of such partner’s capital contribution! As so interpreted, we think the judgment is correct.

The judgment should be affirmed, without costs.

Present — Martin, P. J., Untermyer, Dore, Cohn and Callahan, JJ.

Judgment unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Mateyka v. Reischmann, 264 A.D. 752, 34 N.Y.S.2d 617 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1942).

Pincite

264 A.D. 752 (Mateyka v. Reischmann) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.