From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bush Terminal Company v. City of New York

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Mar 29, 1932
259 N.Y. 509 (N.Y. 1932)

Summary

In Bush Terminal Co. v. City of New York (259 N.Y. 509) it was held that such provisions do not apply to a municipal corporation as a party.

Summary of this case from Langdon v. State of New York

Opinion

Argued March 14, 1932

Decided March 29, 1932

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

Arthur J.W. Hilly, Corporation Counsel ( Sigmund F. Sarnowski and Joseph P. Reilly of counsel), for appellant.

Harper A. Holt and Abner J. Grossman for respondent.


Order of the Appellate Division reversed and that of the Special Term affirmed, with costs in this court and in the Appellate Division, and the question certified answered in the negative on the authority of Davidson v. City of New York ( 221 N.Y. 487); no opinion.

Concur: POUND, Ch. J., CRANE, LEHMAN, O'BRIEN and HUBBS, JJ. Not sitting: KELLOGG, J.


Summaries of

Bush Terminal Company v. City of New York

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Mar 29, 1932
259 N.Y. 509 (N.Y. 1932)

In Bush Terminal Co. v. City of New York (259 N.Y. 509) it was held that such provisions do not apply to a municipal corporation as a party.

Summary of this case from Langdon v. State of New York
Case details for

Bush Terminal Company v. City of New York

Case Details

Full title:BUSH TERMINAL COMPANY, Respondent, v. THE CITY OF NEW YORK, Appellant

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Mar 29, 1932

Citations

259 N.Y. 509 (N.Y. 1932)
182 N.E. 158

Citing Cases

Warnke v. City of New York

May 7, 1937. Order granting plaintiff's motion to examine defendant before trial as an adverse party, through…

Schmiedel v. State of New York

Moreover, to invoke the Maloney decision for a ruling against what is asked for here would over-look the…