Waterfront Commission of New York Harbor v. Standard Fruit & Steamship Co.
371 N.E.2d 533, 43 N.Y.2d 657, 400 N.Y.S.2d 815, 1977 N.Y. LEXIS 2480
Opinion
OPINION OF THE COURT
Order modified, with costs to respondent to the extent of excusing compliance with the subpoena for 30 days from the date hereof and, as so modified, affirmed. Question certified answered in the affirmative. (See Matter of Standard Fruit & S. S. Co. v Waterfront Comm, of N. Y. Harbor, 43 NY2d 11, decided herewith.)
Concur: Chief Judge Breitel and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Cooke.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Waterfront Commission of New York Harbor v. Standard Fruit & Steamship Co., 371 N.E.2d 533, 43 N.Y.2d 657, 400 N.Y.S.2d 815, 1977 N.Y. LEXIS 2480 (N.Y. 1977).
371 N.E.2d 533 (Waterfront Commission of New York Harbor v. Standard Fruit & Steamship Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Rosenbaum v. Lefrak Corp.
80 A.D.2d 337 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1981)