From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Terger Holding Corporation v. Frankel

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 1, 1933
238 App. Div. 853 (N.Y. App. Div. 1933)

Opinion

March, 1933.

Present — Lazansky, P.J., Kapper, Carswell, Scudder and Tompkins, JJ.


Order denying motion for injunction pendente lite unanimously affirmed. Order granting defendants' motion for judgment on the pleadings and judgment entered thereon dismissing the complaint on the merits unanimously affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. The alleged ordinance or local law of October 24, 1924, may not be considered. It is not in this record and apparently was not before the court at Special Term. If it had existence, the validity of its enactment and its applicability or inapplicability may be determined only on a record which contains it.

See Long Beach Local Laws of 1924, No. 3; City Home Rule Law, § 32. — [REP.


Summaries of

Terger Holding Corporation v. Frankel

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 1, 1933
238 App. Div. 853 (N.Y. App. Div. 1933)
Case details for

Terger Holding Corporation v. Frankel

Case Details

Full title:TERGER HOLDING CORPORATION, Appellant, v. FRANK FRANKEL, Individually and…

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

Date published: Mar 1, 1933

Citations

238 App. Div. 853 (N.Y. App. Div. 1933)