People ex rel. 186 Riverside Drive Corp. v. Lilly

268 A.D. 896, 51 N.Y.S.2d 753, 1944 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4111
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided November 10, 1944·No. No. 14709·Published

Opinion

Final order entered April 13, 1942, modified by eliminating all provisions for review of the 1932 assessment and by dismissing the proceedings as to that year; and as so modified, affirmed. (People ex rel. Northchester Corp. v. Miller, 288 N. Y. 163.) The defect being jurisdictional may be raised by an appeal from the final order. Present — Martin, P. J., Townley, Glennon, Untermyer and Dore, JJ.; Untermyer, J., dissents and votes to affirm on the ground that the question presented may only be raised on a direct appeal from the order which allowed the writ to be served nunc pro tune and is not subject to collateral attack. (No. 14710.) Order entered March 9, 1943, so far as appealed from, unanimously modified by granting the motion to strike from the record on appeal an appraisal made by one "Victor M. Earle on premises 585 West End Avenue [897] which was not in evidence upon the trial, and as so modified, affirmed. No opinion. Present — Martin, P. J., Townley, Glennon, Untermyer and Dore, JJ. (No. 14711.) Appeal from order entered September 15, 1943, dismissed. No opinion. Settle order on notice. Present — Martin, P. J., Townley, Glennon, Untermyer and Dore, JJ.

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

People ex rel. 186 Riverside Drive Corp. v. Lilly, 268 A.D. 896, 51 N.Y.S.2d 753, 1944 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4111 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1944).

268 A.D. 896 (People ex rel. 186 Riverside Drive Corp. v. Lilly) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People Ex Rel. Northchester Corp. v. Miller
42 N.E.2d 469 (New York Court of Appeals, 1942)