Sherwood v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Sherwood v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co.

264 A.D. 888, 35 N.Y.S.2d 859, 1942 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5260

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

DecidedJune 22, 1942

StatusPublished

This text of 264 A.D. 888 (Sherwood v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co.) 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

Sherwood v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co., 264 A.D. 888, 35 N.Y.S.2d 859, 1942 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5260 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1942).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from an order denying the corporate executor’s motion to transfer this action from the Supreme Court, Queens County, to the Surrogate’s Court of New York County, pursuant to section 190-a of the Civil Practice Act. Order reversed on the law and the facts, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and the motion granted, without costs. In the exercise of a sound legal discretion, this motion should have been granted in view of a prompt trial being available in the Surrogate’s Court. This course will avoid a year’s delay that would ensue if the action be retained in Queens county, and also avoid a similar delay in the administration [889]*889of the decedent’s estate. The plaintiff should welcome an early disposition of his causes of action if they have merit. Lazansky, P. J-, Hagarly, Carswell, Johnston and Adel, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal from an order denying the corporate executor’s motion to transfer this action from the Supreme Court, Queens County, to the Surrogate’s Court of New York County, pursuant to section 190-a of the Civil Practice Act. Order reversed on the law and the facts, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and the motion granted, without costs. In the exercise of a sound legal discretion, this motion should have been granted in view of a prompt trial being available in the Surrogate’s Court. This course will avoid a year’s delay that would ensue if the action be retained in Queens county, and also avoid a similar delay in the administration [889]*889of the decedent’s estate. The plaintiff should welcome an early disposition of his causes of action if they have merit. Lazansky, P. J-, Hagarly, Carswell, Johnston and Adel, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

264 A.D. 888, 35 N.Y.S.2d 859, 1942 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5260, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sherwood-v-central-hanover-bank-trust-co-nyappdiv-1942.