From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

GLUECK v. TULL

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 28, 1920
192 App. Div. 82 (N.Y. App. Div. 1920)

Opinion

May 28, 1920.

Harry E. Herman of counsel [ A.O. Ernst with him on the brief; Herman Ernst, attorneys], for the appellant.

Leo G. Rose, for the respondents.


For the reasons stated in Glueck v. Tull ( 192 App. Div. 81), decided herewith, the order will be modified by striking therefrom subdivision 3, which requires a stipulation to try the issues before a referee, and inserting in lieu thereof that the case be restored to the trial calendar, and may be placed on the day calendar for trial on two days' notice, with ten dollars costs and disbursements to the appellant.

CLARKE, P.J., LAUGHLIN, DOWLING, PAGE and GREENBAUM, JJ., concur.

Order modified as indicated in opinion, and as so modified affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements to appellant.


Summaries of

GLUECK v. TULL

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 28, 1920
192 App. Div. 82 (N.Y. App. Div. 1920)
Case details for

GLUECK v. TULL

Case Details

Full title:EDMUND GLUECK and MORTIMER DE GROOT, Copartners, Doing Business under the…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: May 28, 1920

Citations

192 App. Div. 82 (N.Y. App. Div. 1920)