Legal Opinion

Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Inc. v. Griesenbeck

New York Court of Appeals

Decided December 29, 1967PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Memorandum.

The order should be affirmed, with costs, on the opinion at the Appellate Division. We would- only add that an order, such as the one before us, which directs arbitration is a final order in a special proceeding and appealable as such to this court. (See Matter of Wilaka Constr. Co. [New York City Housing Auth.], 17 N Y 2d 195, 204.) The mere fact that this order was made on a motion in a pending action does not impair its finality. (See Marshall Ray Corp. v. Haedke & Co., 16 N Y 2d 967; Agress v. Turkmenilli, 303 N. Y. 797, 799; Gang v. Gang, 253 N. Y. 356, 358.) To the extent…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Gang v. GangNew York Court of Appeals · 1930
  2. Agress v. TurkmenilliNew York Court of Appeals · 1952
  3. Thos. Wolstenholme Co. v. Ria Herlinger Fabrics, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1950

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Flanagan v. Prudential-Bache Securities, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1986
  2. Horsey v. HorseyCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1993
  3. Evansville-Vanderburgh School Corp. v. Evansville Teachers Ass'nIndiana Court of Appeals · 1986
  4. Albright v. Edward D. Jones & Co.Indiana Court of Appeals · 1991
  5. Walters v. FullwoodDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1987

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

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

Powered by the Exa API