Pearlstein v. Baff

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Pearlstein v. Baff

270 A.D. 1043, 63 N.Y.S.2d 710, 1946 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5251

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

DecidedJune 24, 1946

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 270 A.D. 1043 (Pearlstein v. Baff) 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

Pearlstein v. Baff, 270 A.D. 1043, 63 N.Y.S.2d 710, 1946 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5251 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1946).

Pincite

Opinion

Defendants appeal from an interlocutory judgment impressing a trust on certain real property and granting other incidental relief. Judgment reversed on the law and the facts, with costs, and the complaint dismissed on the law, with costs. The finding that the property in question was an asset of the partnership has no support in the evidence. Appeal from decision dismissed. Appeal by defendants Garvin and Claridge Food Products Corp. from an order denying their motion for a new trial on the ground of newly discovered evidence dismissed, without costs. In view of the determination of the appeal from the interlocutory judgment, the appeal from the order is academic. Lewis, P. J., Hagarty, Carswell, Johnston and Adel, JJ., concur.

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

Defendants appeal from an interlocutory judgment impressing a trust on certain real property and granting other incidental relief. Judgment reversed on the law and the facts, with costs, and the complaint dismissed on the law, with costs. The finding that the property in question was an asset of the partnership has no support in the evidence. Appeal from decision dismissed. Appeal by defendants Garvin and Claridge Food Products Corp. from an order denying their motion for a new trial on the ground of newly discovered evidence dismissed, without costs. In view of the determination of the appeal from the interlocutory judgment, the appeal from the order is academic. Lewis, P. J., Hagarty, Carswell, Johnston and Adel, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

270 A.D. 1043, 63 N.Y.S.2d 710, 1946 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5251, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pearlstein-v-baff-nyappdiv-1946.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack