From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Union Chelsea National Bank v. Rumican 190 Corp.

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Jul 6, 1999
717 N.E.2d 1079 (N.Y. 1999)

Opinion

Decided July 6, 1999


Motion, insofar as N. Marius Bucurescu seeks leave to appeal purportedly on behalf of Doina M. Bucurescu and Rumican 190 Corporation, dismissed upon the ground that N. Marius Bucurescu is not the authorized legal representative of said appellants and, as to Rumican 190 Corporation, cannot be its authorized legal representative (see, CPLR 321[a]); motion for leave to appeal by N. Marius Bucurescu on his own behalf denied.


Summaries of

Union Chelsea National Bank v. Rumican 190 Corp.

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Jul 6, 1999
717 N.E.2d 1079 (N.Y. 1999)
Case details for

Union Chelsea National Bank v. Rumican 190 Corp.

Case Details

Full title:UNION CHELSEA NATIONAL BANK, , Respondent, v. RUMICAN 190 CORPORATION, et…

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Jul 6, 1999

Citations

717 N.E.2d 1079 (N.Y. 1999)
717 N.E.2d 1079
695 N.Y.S.2d 742