Dailey v. Gidinsky
New York Court of Appeals
1Per curiam
The final judgment should be modified by striking therefr'om the direction for payment to the plaintiff receiver of sums to be fixed by the court in which the receivership is pending. Whether such payment shall be made to the plaintiff receiver must be determined by the court which appointed him. (Civ. Prac. Act, §§ 804-a, 1547.) In all other respects, the judgments should be affirmed, with costs.
The judgments should be modified in accordance with this opinion and as so modified affirmed, with costs.
Lehman, Ch. J., Loughban, Rippey, Lewis, Conway, Desmond and Thachek, JJ., concur.
Judgment…
2Cited by5 opinions
- United States v. Mr. Hamburg Bronx CorporationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1964
- Kilarjian v. KilarjianAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1969
- 263 West 38th Street Corp. v. KobrinetzAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1946
- 263 West 38th Street Corp. v. KobrinetzAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1946
- East River Savings Bank v. GiangrassoAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1959