Legal Opinion

Kiamesha Concord, Inc. v. Pullman

New York Supreme Court

Decided October 24, 1966PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMatthew M. Levy, J.

In the case at bar, a suit was instituted, a judgment was obtained and supplementary proceedings were brought against ‘ ‘1 Henry ’ Pullman, first name fictitious, true first name unknown ’ ’, without further identification. On the defendant’s default in the supplementary proceedings, the judgment creditor moved to punish the defendant for contempt, naming the respondent on the motion in the same fashion as theretofore. The defendant did not appear. A proposed order has now been submitted, and its pertinent provisions are as follows *.

*211(1) That “‘Henry’ Pullman, etc., the defendant herein, is…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Goldberg v. MarkowitzAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1904
  2. Goldberg v. . MarkowitzNew York Court of Appeals · 1905
  3. Simon v. UnderwoodCity of New York Municipal Court · 1908

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Chavez v. Nevell Mgmt. Co.Civil Court of the City of New York · 1972
  2. Kiamesha Concord, Inc. v. PullmanNew York Supreme Court · 1966

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

Powered by the Exa API