Wexler v. South Brooklyn Savings Bank

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Wexler v. South Brooklyn Savings Bank

33 A.D.2d 575, 305 N.Y.S.2d 984, 1969 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3100

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

DecidedOctober 20, 1969

StatusPublished

This text of 33 A.D.2d 575 (Wexler v. South Brooklyn Savings Bank) 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

Wexler v. South Brooklyn Savings Bank, 33 A.D.2d 575, 305 N.Y.S.2d 984, 1969 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3100 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1969).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action for a declaratory judgment with respect to moneys deposited in certain bank accounts, and for other relief, plaintiff appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated October 25, 1968 and made after a nonjury trial. Appeal dismissed, with costs to respondents Hofferman and Block, unless appellant flies and serves a proper appendix within 30 days after entry of the order hereon. The appendix submitted on this appeal is patently insufficient for the purpose of passing on the contention raised in appellant’s brief. The trial produced over 200 pages of transcript of which the appendix contains three pages of testimony (Lo Gerfo v. Lo Gerfo, 30 A D 2d 156; Nelsen v. Rampone, 31 A D 2d 933; see E. P. Reynolds, Inc. v. Nager Elec. Co., 17 N Y 2d 51; Melville v. Melville, 29 A D 2d 679; Pollack v. Pollack, 25 A D 2d 756; CPLR 5528). Rabin, Acting P. J., Hopkins, Benjamin, Munder and Martuseello, JJ., concur.

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

In an action for a declaratory judgment with respect to moneys deposited in certain bank accounts, and for other relief, plaintiff appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated October 25, 1968 and made after a nonjury trial. Appeal dismissed, with costs to respondents Hofferman and Block, unless appellant flies and serves a proper appendix within 30 days after entry of the order hereon. The appendix submitted on this appeal is patently insufficient for the purpose of passing on the contention raised in appellant’s brief. The trial produced over 200 pages of transcript of which the appendix contains three pages of testimony (Lo Gerfo v. Lo Gerfo, 30 A D 2d 156; Nelsen v. Rampone, 31 A D 2d 933; see E. P. Reynolds, Inc. v. Nager Elec. Co., 17 N Y 2d 51; Melville v. Melville, 29 A D 2d 679; Pollack v. Pollack, 25 A D 2d 756; CPLR 5528). Rabin, Acting P. J., Hopkins, Benjamin, Munder and Martuseello, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

33 A.D.2d 575, 305 N.Y.S.2d 984, 1969 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3100, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wexler-v-south-brooklyn-savings-bank-nyappdiv-1969.