Spiro v. Einziger

182 Misc. 120, 50 N.Y.S.2d 85, 1944 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2276
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York·Decided June 29, 1944·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Memorandum Per Curiam.

Upon the entry of the order of interpleader the action became one in equity (Clark v. Mosher, 107 N. Y. 118, 122; Levy v. Niklad, 259 App. Div. 54) and the court below was therewith divested of all jurisdiction to deter.mine which of the claimants was entitled to be paid the fund in controversy.

The judgment should be reversed on the law, without costs, and complaint dismissed, without prejudice to the rights of any of the parties. •

MacCrate, Smith and Steinbbink, JJ., concur.

Judgment reversed, etc.

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

Spiro v. Einziger, 182 Misc. 120, 50 N.Y.S.2d 85, 1944 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2276 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1944).

182 Misc. 120 (Spiro v. Einziger) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Agricultural Insurance v. Matthews
301 A.D.2d 257 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2002)