Mulligan v. Wetchler

287 N.E.2d 391, 30 N.Y.2d 951, 335 N.Y.S.2d 701, 1972 N.Y. LEXIS 1156
New York Court of Appeals·Decided July 7, 1972·Published·Cited by 7 cases

Opinion

Motion granted and the appeal dismissed, with costs and $10 costs of motion, upon the grounds that the Appellate Division order did not direct modification of the judgment appealed from in a substantial respect and that defendant is not aggrieved by the modification (CPLR 5601, subd. [a], par. [iii]; and see Weinberg v. Wishweg Realty Corp., 29 N Y 2d 648; Amadeus, Inc. v. State of New York, 29 N Y 2d 634; and that the dissent is not upon a stated question of law (CPLR 5601, subd. [a], par. [i]).

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

Mulligan v. Wetchler, 287 N.E.2d 391, 30 N.Y.2d 951, 335 N.Y.S.2d 701, 1972 N.Y. LEXIS 1156 (N.Y. 1972).

287 N.E.2d 391 (Mulligan v. Wetchler) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Ellis v. Ellis
235 A.D.2d 1002 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1997)
King v. Burkowski
155 A.D.2d 285 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1989)
Shapiro v. Shapiro
151 A.D.2d 559 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1989)
Bonnot v. Fishman
88 A.D.2d 650 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1982)
Horton v. Niagara Falls Memorial Center
51 A.D.2d 152 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1976)