Rosemond v. Corscadden

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Rosemond v. Corscadden

223 A.D. 806

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

DecidedMarch 15, 1928

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 223 A.D. 806 (Rosemond v. Corscadden) 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

Rosemond v. Corscadden, 223 A.D. 806 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1928).

Pincite

Opinion

Order reversed, as a matter of law, and not in the exercise of discretion, and motion denied, without costs, on the ground that the justice had no authority to make the order, the defect complained of being jurisdictional, and the statute requiring the verification being mandatory; and on the authority of Matter of Swarthout (76 Misc. 24); Matter of Murphy (189 App. Div. 135), and Matter of King (155 id. 720). Van Kirk, P. J., Hinman, Whitmyer and Hasbrouck, JJ., concur; Davis, J., dissents and votes for affirmance.

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

Order reversed, as a matter of law, and not in the exercise of discretion, and motion denied, without costs, on the ground that the justice had no authority to make the order, the defect complained of being jurisdictional, and the statute requiring the verification being mandatory; and on the authority of Matter of Swarthout (76 Misc. 24); Matter of Murphy (189 App. Div. 135), and Matter of King (155 id. 720). Van Kirk, P. J., Hinman, Whitmyer and Hasbrouck, JJ., concur; Davis, J., dissents and votes for affirmance.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

223 A.D. 806, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rosemond-v-corscadden-nyappdiv-1928.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack