Schulman v. Modern Industrial Bank
This text of 266 A.D. 833 (Schulman v. Modern Industrial Bank) 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.
Opinion
No opinion. Present — Martin, P. J., Townley, Untermyer, Cohn and Callahan, JJ.; Callahan, J., dissents and votes to reverse the judgment and order and deny the motion on the ground that the allegation that plaintiff “ was served with a subpoena requiring his appearance for examination by the District Attorney of Bronx County, at the complaint of defendant herein,” coupled with the other allegations, set forth an interference with plaintiff’s person. The complaint is, therefore, sufficient. [178 Misc. 847.]
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
266 A.D. 833, 43 N.Y.S.2d 509, 1943 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4719, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/schulman-v-modern-industrial-bank-nyappdiv-1943.