Schaffer v. Sella

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Schaffer v. Sella

96 A.D.2d 533, 464 N.Y.S.2d 995, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 19055

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

DecidedJuly 11, 1983

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 96 A.D.2d 533 (Schaffer v. Sella) 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

Schaffer v. Sella, 96 A.D.2d 533, 464 N.Y.S.2d 995, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 19055 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1983).

Pincite

Opinion

■— In an action, inter alia, to recover damages resulting from defendants’ failure to transfer or issue stock, defendants Ronald Sella, Linda Sella and Shenandoah Trading Co. Ltd., appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (Rosenblatt, J.), dated July 1, 1982, which denied their motion to dismiss the amended complaint, and denied their motion for summary judgment. Order affirmed, with costs. No opinion. The stock certificates were improperly included in the record on appeal since they were not before Special Term (CPLR 5526). Therefore, they have not been considered (Arnold v New City Condominiums Corp., 88 AD2d 578; Block v Nelson, 71 AD2d 509). Mollen, P. J., Titone, Weinstein and Rubin, JJ., concur.

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

■— In an action, inter alia, to recover damages resulting from defendants’ failure to transfer or issue stock, defendants Ronald Sella, Linda Sella and Shenandoah Trading Co. Ltd., appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (Rosenblatt, J.), dated July 1, 1982, which denied their motion to dismiss the amended complaint, and denied their motion for summary judgment. Order affirmed, with costs. No opinion. The stock certificates were improperly included in the record on appeal since they were not before Special Term (CPLR 5526). Therefore, they have not been considered (Arnold v New City Condominiums Corp., 88 AD2d 578; Block v Nelson, 71 AD2d 509). Mollen, P. J., Titone, Weinstein and Rubin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

96 A.D.2d 533, 464 N.Y.S.2d 995, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 19055, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/schaffer-v-sella-nyappdiv-1983.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack