Muro Transit Mix Corp. v. Doe

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Muro Transit Mix Corp. v. Doe

5 A.D.2d 701, 169 N.Y.S.2d 1013, 1957 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3428

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

DecidedDecember 30, 1957

StatusPublished

This text of 5 A.D.2d 701 (Muro Transit Mix Corp. v. Doe) 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

Muro Transit Mix Corp. v. Doe, 5 A.D.2d 701, 169 N.Y.S.2d 1013, 1957 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3428 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1957).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover a chattel, the appeal, pursuant to leave granted [702]*702by the Appellate Term, is from an order of said court affirming (1) an order of the Municipal Court of the City of New York, Borough of Brooklyn, First District, dated June 1, 1956 granting respondent’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, and (2) an order of said Municipal Court dated June 21, 1956 amending its prior order so as to provide that respondent may, upon notice, set the matter of his damages for a hearing. Order of the Appellate Term affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. No opinion.

Ughetta, Halli-nan and Kleinfeld, JJ., concur; Nolan, P. J., and Murphy, J., dissent and vote to reverse the order on the ground that triable issues of fact are presented.

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

In an action to recover a chattel, the appeal, pursuant to leave granted [702]*702by the Appellate Term, is from an order of said court affirming (1) an order of the Municipal Court of the City of New York, Borough of Brooklyn, First District, dated June 1, 1956 granting respondent’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, and (2) an order of said Municipal Court dated June 21, 1956 amending its prior order so as to provide that respondent may, upon notice, set the matter of his damages for a hearing. Order of the Appellate Term affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. No opinion.

Ughetta, Halli-nan and Kleinfeld, JJ., concur; Nolan, P. J., and Murphy, J., dissent and vote to reverse the order on the ground that triable issues of fact are presented.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

5 A.D.2d 701, 169 N.Y.S.2d 1013, 1957 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3428, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/muro-transit-mix-corp-v-doe-nyappdiv-1957.