Vogel v. Asgrow Mandeville Co.
431 N.E.2d 305, 55 N.Y.2d 675, 446 N.Y.S.2d 944, 1981 N.Y. LEXIS 3249
Opinions
OPINION OF THE COURT
Order affirmed, with costs, for the reasons stated in the memorandum at the Appellate Division (74 AD2d 940), and question certified answered in the negative. It is noted that we are not here concerned with possible differences between CPLR 317 and 5015, the moving papers on this motion being insufficient to establish a meritorious defense.
Concur: Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Jones and Wachtler. Judge Meyer dissents and votes to reverse in an opinion in which Judges Gabrielli and FuChsberg concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Vogel v. Asgrow Mandeville Co., 431 N.E.2d 305, 55 N.Y.2d 675, 446 N.Y.S.2d 944, 1981 N.Y. LEXIS 3249 (N.Y. 1981).
431 N.E.2d 305 (Vogel v. Asgrow Mandeville Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Barone v. Barone
54 Misc. 3d 599 (New York Supreme Court, 2016)
Howlan v. Rosol
139 A.D.2d 799 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1988)
Cristo Bros. v. M. Cristo, Inc.
91 A.D.2d 807 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1982)