Legal Opinion
Blumenstock v. Weissman
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York
Decided March 30, 1966PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Per curiam
In our opinion the holding of the County Court that it lacked jurisdiction to entertain the motion to vacate its prior determination would be equally applicable to the Justice’s Court had an application for similar relief been directed to that court in the first instance. (See Duran v. Chelsea Exch. Bank, 123 Misc. 158.)
The order should be affirmed, with $10 costs.
Margett, Brenner and Ollifpe, JJ., concur.
Order affirmed, etc.
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Duran v. Chelsea Exchange BankAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1924
3Cited by3 opinions
- Aurnou v. GreenspanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992
- Merrill v. RobinsonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1984
- Department of Housing Preservation & Development v. Park Properties Development AssociatesCivil Court of the City of New York · 1992