Pioneer Village Development Corp. v. XAR Corp.
397 N.E.2d 1334, 48 N.Y.2d 752, 422 N.Y.S.2d 667, 1979 N.Y. LEXIS 2397
Opinion
Motion for leave to appeal dismissed, with $20 costs and necessary reproduction disbursements, upon the ground that [753] the prior application for permission to appeal, made to the Appellate Division, was untimely (CPLR 5513, subd [c]; cf. CPLR 5514, subd [a]; Cohen and Karger, Powers of the New York Court of Appeals, § 101, p 429; see, e.g., Schwartz v National Computer Corp., 38 NY2d 800).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Pioneer Village Development Corp. v. XAR Corp., 397 N.E.2d 1334, 48 N.Y.2d 752, 422 N.Y.S.2d 667, 1979 N.Y. LEXIS 2397 (N.Y. 1979).
397 N.E.2d 1334 (Pioneer Village Development Corp. v. XAR Corp.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Schwartz v. National Computer Corp.
345 N.E.2d 344 (New York Court of Appeals, 1975)