Smachlo v. Bausch

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Smachlo v. Bausch

63 A.D.2d 871, 406 N.Y.S.2d 685, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11856

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

DecidedJune 1, 1978

StatusPublished

This text of 63 A.D.2d 871 (Smachlo v. Bausch) 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

Smachlo v. Bausch, 63 A.D.2d 871, 406 N.Y.S.2d 685, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11856 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1978).

Pincite

Opinion

Order of the Supreme Court, New York County, entered September 16, 1977, which partially granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment and partially granted plaintiffs cross motion for summary judgment, unanimously modified, on the law, to the extent of limiting the assessment of damages to the period subsequent to plaintiffs acquisition of stock in defendants’ corporation, and otherwise affirmed on the opinion of Fein, J., at Special Term, without costs or disbursements. We observe, with respect to the assessment ordered on the issue of damages, that such damages be limited to those, if any, which arose subsequent to plaintiff’s purchase of stock in defendants’ corporation. This view is supported by Austin v Gardiner (188 Mise 538), upon which plaintiff has relied. Concur—Murphy, P. J., Birns, Markewich and Yesawich, JJ.

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

Order of the Supreme Court, New York County, entered September 16, 1977, which partially granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment and partially granted plaintiffs cross motion for summary judgment, unanimously modified, on the law, to the extent of limiting the assessment of damages to the period subsequent to plaintiffs acquisition of stock in defendants’ corporation, and otherwise affirmed on the opinion of Fein, J., at Special Term, without costs or disbursements. We observe, with respect to the assessment ordered on the issue of damages, that such damages be limited to those, if any, which arose subsequent to plaintiff’s purchase of stock in defendants’ corporation. This view is supported by Austin v Gardiner (188 Mise 538), upon which plaintiff has relied. Concur—Murphy, P. J., Birns, Markewich and Yesawich, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

63 A.D.2d 871, 406 N.Y.S.2d 685, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11856, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smachlo-v-bausch-nyappdiv-1978.