Snitow v. Dukes

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Snitow v. Dukes

10 A.D.2d 547, 199 N.Y.S.2d 403, 1960 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12413

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

DecidedJanuary 11, 1960

StatusPublished

This text of 10 A.D.2d 547 (Snitow v. Dukes) 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

Snitow v. Dukes, 10 A.D.2d 547, 199 N.Y.S.2d 403, 1960 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12413 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1960).

Pincite

Opinion

Motion insofar as it seeks dismissal of the appeals is denied with leave, however, to renew upon the argument or submission of the appeals. Insofar as the motion seeks to require appellants to print additional papers, it is denied on condition that the appellants hand up on the argument or submission of the appeals the originals or true copies of all papers recited in Mr. Justice Epstein’s decision appearing in the New Yorh Lem Journal on December 15, 1959, granting resettlement of the order denying rehearing or reargument, which are not included in the printed record. In all other respects the motion is denied. Concur — Botein, P. J., Breitel, Rabin, M. M. Frank and Yalente, JJ.

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

Motion insofar as it seeks dismissal of the appeals is denied with leave, however, to renew upon the argument or submission of the appeals. Insofar as the motion seeks to require appellants to print additional papers, it is denied on condition that the appellants hand up on the argument or submission of the appeals the originals or true copies of all papers recited in Mr. Justice Epstein’s decision appearing in the New Yorh Lem Journal on December 15, 1959, granting resettlement of the order denying rehearing or reargument, which are not included in the printed record. In all other respects the motion is denied. Concur — Botein, P. J., Breitel, Rabin, M. M. Frank and Yalente, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

10 A.D.2d 547, 199 N.Y.S.2d 403, 1960 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12413, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/snitow-v-dukes-nyappdiv-1960.