Legal Opinion

Douglass v. Chisholm

New York Supreme Court

Decided July 9, 1931PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

I. Maurice Wormser,

Referee. The facts are elaborated upon sufficiently in the findings of fact annexed to my report. It will be noted that I have not seen fit to adopt the proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law in toto submitted by either side, though with certain modifications and alterations I have adopted substantially the proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law submitted by the attorneys for the petitioners.

An important point of law is involved which demands brief consideration. In my opinion, judgments over ten years old cease to be hens upon real estate, and,…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Nutt v. . CumingNew York Court of Appeals · 1898
  2. House v. Amsdell Brewing & Malting Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1909
  3. Velleman v. . RohrigNew York Court of Appeals · 1908
  4. Treacy v. EllisAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1899
  5. Kirby v. . FitzgeraldNew York Court of Appeals · 1865

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Blankman v. Nino's Continental, Inc.New York Supreme Court · 1960
  2. In re Mayor of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1935
  3. In re the City Trust Co.New York Supreme Court · 1934

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API