From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Frank v. Carlisle

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Jul 24, 1940
283 N.Y. 776 (N.Y. 1940)

Opinion

Submitted July 23, 1940

Decided July 24, 1940


The only question presented by counsel on the appeal in this action related to the sufficiency of the complaint in the allegations regarding the so-called Oswego transactions and, as the per curiam opinion shows, that was the only portion of the complaint considered by us in our determination reversing the judgment of the Appellate Division. Other portions of the complaint were disregarded upon the express statement of the appellant's counsel that we need not consider them.

The motion for reargument should be denied, with ten dollars costs and necessary printing disbursements. (See 282 N.Y. 507.)

The motion to amend the remittitur should be denied.


Summaries of

Frank v. Carlisle

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Jul 24, 1940
283 N.Y. 776 (N.Y. 1940)
Case details for

Frank v. Carlisle

Case Details

Full title:OTTO FRANK, Appellant, v. FLOYD L. CARLISLE et al., Respondents, Impleaded…

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Jul 24, 1940

Citations

283 N.Y. 776 (N.Y. 1940)