From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Sullivan Cromwell v. Hudson Manhattan Corp.

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Jun 10, 1971
272 N.E.2d 572 (N.Y. 1971)

Opinion

Argued May 25, 1971

Decided June 10, 1971

Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department, CHARLES A. LORETO, J.

Sheldon Oliensis, L. Robert Driver, Jr., Jay G. Strum and Randolph S. Sherman for appellants.

Sullivan Cromwell ( William Piel, Jr. and Philip L. Graham, Jr. of counsel), respondent, pro se.


Orders affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: Judges BURKE, SCILEPPI, BERGAN, BREITEL, JASEN and GIBSON. Taking no part: Chief Judge FULD.


Summaries of

Sullivan Cromwell v. Hudson Manhattan Corp.

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Jun 10, 1971
272 N.E.2d 572 (N.Y. 1971)
Case details for

Sullivan Cromwell v. Hudson Manhattan Corp.

Case Details

Full title:SULLIVAN CROMWELL, Respondent, v. HUDSON MANHATTAN CORPORATION, Appellant…

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Jun 10, 1971

Citations

272 N.E.2d 572 (N.Y. 1971)
272 N.E.2d 572
324 N.Y.S.2d 79

Citing Cases

Trimboli v. Scarpaci Funeral Home, Inc.

Samuel J. Sussman and Jacob Miller for respondents. Order affirmed, with costs, on the opinion at the…

De Graff, Foy, Conway & Holt-Harris v. McKesson & Robbins, Inc.

A fee contingent on success should be substantially higher because of the possibility that, despite the…