Tillman v. Russo-Asiatic Bank
191 N.E. 518, 264 N.Y. 467, 1934 N.Y. LEXIS 1520
Opinion
Order affirmed, with costs. The effect of the ex parte order at Special Term was merely to create a notation on the record of valid action taken by the Federal court. First question certified in the affirmative. Second question certified not answered. No opinion. (See 264 N. Y. 670.)
Concur: Pound, Ch. J., Crane, Lehman, O’Brien, Hubbs and Crouch, JJ. Not sitting: Kellogg, J.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Tillman v. Russo-Asiatic Bank, 191 N.E. 518, 264 N.Y. 467, 1934 N.Y. LEXIS 1520 (N.Y. 1934).
191 N.E. 518 (Tillman v. Russo-Asiatic Bank) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Tillman v. Russo-Asiatic Bank
191 N.E. 618 (New York Court of Appeals, 1934)