Porcelain v. Carl Zeiss, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Porcelain v. Carl Zeiss, Inc.

92 A.D.2d 863, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 17237

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

DecidedMarch 7, 1983

StatusPublished

This text of 92 A.D.2d 863 (Porcelain v. Carl Zeiss, Inc.) 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

Porcelain v. Carl Zeiss, Inc., 92 A.D.2d 863, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 17237 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1983).

Pincite

Opinion

— In an action to recover damages, inter alla, for breach of contract, defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Rosenzweig, J.), dated January 4, 1982, which denied their motion to dismiss certain causes of action. This appeal brings up for review so much of a subsequent order of the same court, dated April 16,1982, as, upon reargument, adhered to the original determination, denying defendants’ motion insofar as it was to dismiss the first, fourth and fifth causes of action. Appeal from order dated January 4, 1982 dismissed. This order was superseded by the order dated April 16,1982, entered upon reargument. Order dated April 16, 1982, affirmed insofar as reviewed. No opinion. Respondent is awarded one bill of $50 costs and disbursements. Damiani, J. P., Gulotta, O’Connor and Weinstein, JJ., concur.

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

— In an action to recover damages, inter alla, for breach of contract, defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Rosenzweig, J.), dated January 4, 1982, which denied their motion to dismiss certain causes of action. This appeal brings up for review so much of a subsequent order of the same court, dated April 16,1982, as, upon reargument, adhered to the original determination, denying defendants’ motion insofar as it was to dismiss the first, fourth and fifth causes of action. Appeal from order dated January 4, 1982 dismissed. This order was superseded by the order dated April 16,1982, entered upon reargument. Order dated April 16, 1982, affirmed insofar as reviewed. No opinion. Respondent is awarded one bill of $50 costs and disbursements. Damiani, J. P., Gulotta, O’Connor and Weinstein, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

92 A.D.2d 863, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 17237, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/porcelain-v-carl-zeiss-inc-nyappdiv-1983.