Pfohl v. Amax, Inc.

670 N.E.2d 446, 88 N.Y.2d 931, 647 N.Y.S.2d 162, 1996 N.Y. LEXIS 1621
CourtNew York Court of Appeals
DecidedJune 28, 1996
StatusPublished

This text of 670 N.E.2d 446 (Pfohl v. Amax, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Pfohl v. Amax, Inc., 670 N.E.2d 446, 88 N.Y.2d 931, 647 N.Y.S.2d 162, 1996 N.Y. LEXIS 1621 (N.Y. 1996).

Opinion

Motion for leave to appeal dismissed as untimely. The prior [932]*932motion for leave to appeal made to the Appellate Division was untimely (Cohen and Karger, Powers of the New York Court of Appeals § 101, at 429).

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
670 N.E.2d 446, 88 N.Y.2d 931, 647 N.Y.S.2d 162, 1996 N.Y. LEXIS 1621, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pfohl-v-amax-inc-ny-1996.