Heinsheimer v. Schulte
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Appeal by Anton H. Meyer, as assignee, etc., from an order of the Supreme Court, made at the New York Special Term and entered in the office of the clerk of the county of New York on the 6th day of June, 1914, confirming the report of a referee in a proceeding to enforce respondent’s lien, with notice of an intention to bring up for review an order entered in said clerk’s office on the 24th day of June, 1913, establishing the respondent’s lien and directing a reference to…
Read the full summary
Appeal by Anton H. Meyer, as assignee, etc., from an order of the Supreme Court, made at the New York Special Term and entered in the office of the clerk of the county of New York on the 6th day of June, 1914, confirming the report of a referee in a proceeding to enforce respondent’s lien, with notice of an intention to bring up for review an order entered in said clerk’s office on the 24th day of June, 1913, establishing the respondent’s lien and directing a reference to determine the amount thereof.
1Opinion of the Court
McLaughlin, J.:
Upon a former appeal (Matter of Heinsheimer, 159 App. Div. 33) this court affirmed an order declaring the existence of a lien and directing a reference to ascertain its amount.
The appellant cannot again review such order in this court or procure a reargument in the manner here sought. The order which was affirmed on the prior appeal sent the matter to a referee to determine the amount due the attorney, first, under his general retainer; and second, to ascertain the reasonable value of services rendered in the action of Meyer v. Schulte, from February 12, 1910, to December 22,…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Heinsheimer v. SchulteAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1913
- Meyer v. SchulteAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1911
3Cited by1 opinion
- International Telemeter, Corporation v. Hamlin International Corporation and Philip D. HamlinCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1985