Unity Estates, Inc. v. Abrams

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Unity Estates, Inc. v. Abrams

3 A.D.2d 699, 159 N.Y.S.2d 40, 1957 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6460

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

DecidedFebruary 11, 1957

StatusPublished

This text of 3 A.D.2d 699 (Unity Estates, Inc. v. Abrams) 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

Unity Estates, Inc. v. Abrams, 3 A.D.2d 699, 159 N.Y.S.2d 40, 1957 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6460 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1957).

Pincite

Opinion

Neither the brief submitted by petitioner, its affidavits submitted at Special Term, nor the oral argument made on its behalf in this court, are comprehensible to us. From the intelligible matter in the record, it appears that the notice of appeal had not been timely served or filed. Consequently, the appeal must be dismissed. It is also noted, however, that if the appeal were entertainable, the record made by respondent Administrator is not contradicted by rational or credible evidentiary matter. On that record, it appears that the proceeding was not timely brought, or that even timely protest, as required by statute, was made. Thus, on any view, an affirmance of the order of Special Term would necessarily follow. Accordingly, the appeal is unanimously dismissed, with $50 costs and disbursements to the respondent. Concur ■—Breitel, J. P., Rabin, Frank and Valente, JJ.

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

Neither the brief submitted by petitioner, its affidavits submitted at Special Term, nor the oral argument made on its behalf in this court, are comprehensible to us. From the intelligible matter in the record, it appears that the notice of appeal had not been timely served or filed. Consequently, the appeal must be dismissed. It is also noted, however, that if the appeal were entertainable, the record made by respondent Administrator is not contradicted by rational or credible evidentiary matter. On that record, it appears that the proceeding was not timely brought, or that even timely protest, as required by statute, was made. Thus, on any view, an affirmance of the order of Special Term would necessarily follow. Accordingly, the appeal is unanimously dismissed, with $50 costs and disbursements to the respondent. Concur ■—Breitel, J. P., Rabin, Frank and Valente, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

3 A.D.2d 699, 159 N.Y.S.2d 40, 1957 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6460, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/unity-estates-inc-v-abrams-nyappdiv-1957.