From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Vogel v. Schenck

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Feb 28, 1961
12 A.D.2d 924 (N.Y. App. Div. 1961)

Opinion

February 28, 1961


Order entered on April 14, 1960, insofar as it denied appellants' motion to dismiss the amended complaint for legal insufficiency, unanimously reversed, on the law, with $20 costs and disbursements to appellants, the motion granted, and the amended complaint dismissed, with $10 costs, without prejudice to the commencement of any other action which respondents deem advisable. The Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity and the Contract Carrier Permit are not "merchandise" or "fixtures" within the meaning of those terms as used in section 44 Pers. Prop. of the Personal Property Law (Bulk Sales Act). Moreover, although such certificates and permits may be assignable under conditions prescribed by the issuing authorities, they are neither goods nor chattels nor are they other personal property expressly declared by law to be subject to levy by virtue of execution within section 679 of the Civil Practice Act.

Concur — Breitel, J.P., Rabin, Valente, Stevens and Eager, JJ.


Summaries of

Vogel v. Schenck

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Feb 28, 1961
12 A.D.2d 924 (N.Y. App. Div. 1961)
Case details for

Vogel v. Schenck

Case Details

Full title:RICHARD VOGEL et al., Respondents, v. HOWARD E. SCHENCK et al.…

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

Date published: Feb 28, 1961

Citations

12 A.D.2d 924 (N.Y. App. Div. 1961)