Legal Opinion
Tymchuk v. City of Rochester
New York Supreme Court
Decided May 7, 1964PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtCharles Lambiase, J.
This is an application by the plaintiff for an injunction pendente lite. The show cause order herein requires defendants to show cause ‘ ‘ why an order should not be made and entered herein, restraining and enjoining the defendants, City of Rochester, Jenkins Hart and W. B. Cooper d/b/a United Labor Supply, and each of them and their agents, servants and employees and all other persons acting under their control and authority, from taking any action or making any repairs to the premises of the plaintiff at Nos. 77 and 77% Joiner Street in the City of Rochester, State of New York, pursuant to…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Health Department v. Rector of Trinity ChurchNew York Court of Appeals · 1895
- Tenement House Department v. MoeschenNew York Court of Appeals · 1904
- Adamec v. PostNew York Court of Appeals · 1937
- Jaques v. ToddNew York Supreme Court · 1829
- O. A. Skutt, Inc. v. J. & H. Goodwin, Ltd.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1937
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- City of Rochester v. Diksu Corp.New York Supreme Court · 1965
- Kahan Novoa v. Safra National Bank of New YorkDistrict Court, S.D. Florida · 2003