Murphy v. Ferris

143 Misc. 297, 256 N.Y.S. 457, 1932 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 981
CourtNew York Supreme Court
DecidedJanuary 13, 1932
StatusPublished

This text of 143 Misc. 297 (Murphy v. Ferris) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Murphy v. Ferris, 143 Misc. 297, 256 N.Y.S. 457, 1932 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 981 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1932).

Opinion

Levy, J.

Plaintiff moves to vacate defendant’s notice of appearance, on the ground that the attorneys representing defendant union appear without authority. In this contention plaintiff is supported by the affidavits on the part of defendant. It seems that defendant’s alleged attorneys were engaged by the parent body of which the defendant is a constituent member. But as the latter is an autonomous body for purposes of this action, the intervention of the parent body is improper, particularly as its previous motion to intervene was denied. If defendant’s conduct is a breach of discipline in relation to the parent body, such breach is outside the scope of this litigation. Motion granted. Settle order.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
143 Misc. 297, 256 N.Y.S. 457, 1932 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 981, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/murphy-v-ferris-nysupct-1932.