Schmidt v. Massapequa Co.

240 A.D. 1011

Opinion

Order in so far as an appeal is taken therefrom reversed on the law and the facts and the parts thereof directing a reference and appointing a referee struck out, with ten dollars costs and disbursements to appellant. On the facts disclosed it does not appear that respondent Levy or respondents Gould and Newman had a valid retaining lien as counsel for the attorney of record for plaintiff, who retained control of the action. They have elected to proceed against plaintiff and his attorney by action; and under those circumstances, with the ultimate rights of the parties a matter of doubt, the court will not lend its summary powers to settling a dispute which may be determined by the more orderly method of trial. Young, Kapper, Carswell and Davis, JJ., concur; Lazansky, P. J., dissents as to respondent Levy on the ground that the filing of the undertaking waived the right of appeal.

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

Schmidt v. Massapequa Co., 240 A.D. 1011 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1933).

240 A.D. 1011 (Schmidt v. Massapequa Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.