From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Thal v. Brandwine

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 8, 1951
279 App. Div. 597 (N.Y. App. Div. 1951)

Opinion

October 8, 1951.


In an action for a partnership accounting, plaintiff appeals from an order denying his motion to declare all proceedings had in the action null and void on the ground that respondents' attorney, a librarian, consultation and opinion clerk in the County Court of Kings County was prohibited by section 473 Jud. of the Judiciary Law from practicing as an attorney in any court of this State. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. The position of respondents' attorney is not included in the enumeration of those whose occupants are prohibited from practicing in any court. By regulation of the Judges of the County Court he is prohibited from practice in that court only. Carswell, Acting P.J., Adel, Sneed, Wenzel and MacCrate, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Thal v. Brandwine

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 8, 1951
279 App. Div. 597 (N.Y. App. Div. 1951)
Case details for

Thal v. Brandwine

Case Details

Full title:IRVING THAL, Appellant, v. ABRAHAM BRANDWINE et al., Respondents

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

Date published: Oct 8, 1951

Citations

279 App. Div. 597 (N.Y. App. Div. 1951)