Morgenbesser v. Tartasky

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Morgenbesser v. Tartasky

235 A.D. 697

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

DecidedFebruary 15, 1932

StatusPublished

This text of 235 A.D. 697 (Morgenbesser v. Tartasky) 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

Morgenbesser v. Tartasky, 235 A.D. 697 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1932).

Pincite

Opinion

Order granting appellant’s motion to reopen hearings modified by striking out the conditions imposed, and as so modified affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements to appellant. As the inability of appellant to procure the testimony in question was not the result of any fault on her part, the Special Term improperly imposed conditions upon granting the motion. Lazansky, P. J., Young, Carswell, Tompkins and Davis, JJ., concur.

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

Order granting appellant’s motion to reopen hearings modified by striking out the conditions imposed, and as so modified affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements to appellant. As the inability of appellant to procure the testimony in question was not the result of any fault on her part, the Special Term improperly imposed conditions upon granting the motion. Lazansky, P. J., Young, Carswell, Tompkins and Davis, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

235 A.D. 697, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/morgenbesser-v-tartasky-nyappdiv-1932.