Legal Opinion

Borenstein v. Borenstein

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided November 17, 1939PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCallahan, J.

The order appealed from was improper in that it required the defendants, in order to purge themselves of contempt, to file an accounting, the schedules of which were to be in the form prescribed by plaintiff’s attorneys. Such a provision was vague and indefinite and improperly left to the plaintiff the determination of the question as to whether the defendants’ schedules were sufficient. The order should have provided that the accounting be in the form required by rule 174 of the Rules of. Civil Practice, that is, in debtor and creditor form, and verified by the accounting parties. .

Under the…

2Cited by3 opinions

  1. Matter of Agnew v. New York City Dept. of Corr.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2023
  2. Matter of Agnew v. New York City Dept. of Corr.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2023
  3. Moritt v. BarouchAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1963

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

Powered by the Exa API