Newgas v. Solomon
20 Abb. N. Cas. 175
This text of 20 Abb. N. Cas. 175 (Newgas v. Solomon) 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
Newgas v. Solomon, 20 Abb. N. Cas. 175 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1888).
Opinion
The general term of this department has held that the pendency of an appeal from a judgment [176]*176is not a sufficient reason for delaying to issue an execution thereon against the person,
So held in Havemeyer Sugar Refining Co. v. Taussig, 19 Abb. N. C. 57.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Havemeyer Sugar Refining Co. v. Taussig
51 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 475 (New York Supreme Court, 1887)
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
20 Abb. N. Cas. 175, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/newgas-v-solomon-nysupct-1888.