Stewart v. Soda

239 A.D.2d 966, 662 N.Y.S.2d 281, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6479

This text of 239 A.D.2d 966 (Stewart v. Soda) 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
Stewart v. Soda, 239 A.D.2d 966, 662 N.Y.S.2d 281, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6479 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Opinion

Motion insofar as it seeks summary reversal denied and insofar as it seeks extension of time to perfect appeal granted. Memorandum: Respondent has failed to demonstrate that the unavailable transcripts are necessary to the determination of the appeal taken from the order entered June 24, 1996, and thus summary reversal is not required (see, Matter of Farfaglia v Loveall, 222 AD2d 1127). Issues concerning the contents of a record on appeal must be settled by stipulation of the parties or by order of the court from which the appeal is taken (22 NYCRR 1000.4 [a] [1]). Present—Pine, J. P., Lawton, Doerr, Balio and Boehm, JJ.

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

Related

Farfaglia v. Loveall
222 A.D.2d 1127 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1995)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
239 A.D.2d 966, 662 N.Y.S.2d 281, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6479, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stewart-v-soda-nyappdiv-1997.