Olezewski v. Joblonski

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Olezewski v. Joblonski

254 A.D. 905, 6 N.Y.S.2d 447, 1938 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8252

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

DecidedJune 24, 1938

StatusPublished

This text of 254 A.D. 905 (Olezewski v. Joblonski) 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

Olezewski v. Joblonski, 254 A.D. 905, 6 N.Y.S.2d 447, 1938 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8252 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1938).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action brought by plaintiff against Bridgehampton National Bank to recover the balance of the proceeds of an insurance policy in which plaintiff was the beneficiary, appellants, by an order of the court, were interpleaded as defendants in place of the bank, which was discharged from further liability, and the fund was allowed to remain on deposit in the bank to the credit of the action, subject to the order of the court. Thereafter plaintiff served upon appellants a supplemental complaint setting forth her claim to the fund, and appellants, by answer, set forth their respective claims to the fund. The issue as to who was entitled to the fund was then litigated. Judgment awarding the fund to plaintiff unanimously affirmed, with costs. No opinion. Present — Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Carswell, Johnston and Taylor, JJ.

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

In an action brought by plaintiff against Bridgehampton National Bank to recover the balance of the proceeds of an insurance policy in which plaintiff was the beneficiary, appellants, by an order of the court, were interpleaded as defendants in place of the bank, which was discharged from further liability, and the fund was allowed to remain on deposit in the bank to the credit of the action, subject to the order of the court. Thereafter plaintiff served upon appellants a supplemental complaint setting forth her claim to the fund, and appellants, by answer, set forth their respective claims to the fund. The issue as to who was entitled to the fund was then litigated. Judgment awarding the fund to plaintiff unanimously affirmed, with costs. No opinion. Present — Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Carswell, Johnston and Taylor, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

254 A.D. 905, 6 N.Y.S.2d 447, 1938 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8252, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/olezewski-v-joblonski-nyappdiv-1938.