Pando v. Fernandez

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Pando v. Fernandez

147 A.D.2d 357, 538 N.Y.S.2d 444, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 824

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

DecidedFebruary 2, 1989

StatusPublished

This text of 147 A.D.2d 357 (Pando v. Fernandez) 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

Pando v. Fernandez, 147 A.D.2d 357, 538 N.Y.S.2d 444, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 824 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Burton Sherman, J.), entered on June 3, 1988, and order of said court entered on or about September 30, 1988, unanimously affirmed. Respondent shall recover of appellant one bill of $250 [358]*358costs and disbursements of these appeals. Respondent’s motion to strike the brief of appellant and to dismiss the appeal is denied. Respondent’s motion to amend the orders of this court is granted to the extent of directing appellant’s counsel Arnold C. Stream and/or Milton Sanders, whichever the case may be, within 10 days of the date of entry hereof, to disclose to respondent or his designee the particulars of the escrow deposit. No opinion. Concur — Carro, J. P., Milonas, Wallach and Smith, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Burton Sherman, J.), entered on June 3, 1988, and order of said court entered on or about September 30, 1988, unanimously affirmed. Respondent shall recover of appellant one bill of $250 [358]*358costs and disbursements of these appeals. Respondent’s motion to strike the brief of appellant and to dismiss the appeal is denied. Respondent’s motion to amend the orders of this court is granted to the extent of directing appellant’s counsel Arnold C. Stream and/or Milton Sanders, whichever the case may be, within 10 days of the date of entry hereof, to disclose to respondent or his designee the particulars of the escrow deposit. No opinion. Concur — Carro, J. P., Milonas, Wallach and Smith, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

147 A.D.2d 357, 538 N.Y.S.2d 444, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 824, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pando-v-fernandez-nyappdiv-1989.