Tait v. Sweetbaum

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Tait v. Sweetbaum

236 A.D. 739

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

DecidedJuly 15, 1932

StatusPublished

This text of 236 A.D. 739 (Tait v. Sweetbaum) 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

Tait v. Sweetbaum, 236 A.D. 739 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1932).

Pincite

Opinion

Order denying motion of defendant Sweetbaum to dismiss [740]*740amended complaint for insufficiency reversed on the law, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion granted, with ten dollars costs, on authority of Paul v. Fargo (84 App. Div. 9) and Sachs v. Weinstein (208 id. 360). Young, Carswell, Scudder and Tompkins, JJ., concur; Lazansky, P. J., concurs on the ground that the plaintiff in this action was not a party to the divorce action. She came into the case voluntarily and, therefore, was not maliciously prosecuted.

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

Order denying motion of defendant Sweetbaum to dismiss [740]*740amended complaint for insufficiency reversed on the law, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion granted, with ten dollars costs, on authority of Paul v. Fargo (84 App. Div. 9) and Sachs v. Weinstein (208 id. 360). Young, Carswell, Scudder and Tompkins, JJ., concur; Lazansky, P. J., concurs on the ground that the plaintiff in this action was not a party to the divorce action. She came into the case voluntarily and, therefore, was not maliciously prosecuted.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

236 A.D. 739, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tait-v-sweetbaum-nyappdiv-1932.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack