Milhelm Attea & Bros. v. Department of Taxation & Finance
642 N.E.2d 319, 84 N.Y.2d 851
Opinion
OPINION OF THE COURT
Upon reargument, following remand by the Supreme Court of the United States, order affirmed, with costs.
[854]*854Concur: Chief Judge Kaye and Judges Simons, Titone, Bellacosa, Smith and Ciparick. Taking no part: Judge Levine.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Milhelm Attea & Bros. v. Department of Taxation & Finance, 642 N.E.2d 319, 84 N.Y.2d 851 (N.Y. 1994).
642 N.E.2d 319 (Milhelm Attea & Bros. v. Department of Taxation & Finance) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Matter of Harkenrider v. Hochul
167 N.Y.S.3d 659 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2022)
THE BRIGHTONIAN NURSING HOME v. DAINES, M.D., RICHARD F.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012
Brightonian Nursing Home v. Daines
93 A.D.3d 1355 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)
State v. Liberty Mutual Insurance
23 A.D.3d 1084 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2005)
Clapp v. LeBoeuf, Lamb, Leiby & MacRae
286 A.D.2d 643 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2001)
IFD Construction Corp. v. Dietz
253 A.D.2d 89 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1999)
Liquidation of Union Indemnity Insurance v. Superintendent of Insurance
220 A.D.2d 339 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1995)