Legal Opinion
Grosner v. Abramson
New York Supreme Court
Decided October 19, 1936PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtShientag, J.
The plaintiff moves to discontinue the action which is now on the non-jury calendar. The motion is opposed upon the ground that to grant the relief sought would subject the defendants to further expense and deprive them of manifest advantages which have accrued to them in the conduct of the present litigation. The defendants further contend that, if the court does permit the discontinuance, it should be upon the following conditions:(1) The payment of a full statutory bill of costs;(2) That the examination before trial and the bill of particulars in the pending action shall apply with the…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Winans v. . WinansNew York Court of Appeals · 1891
- Matter of Petition of ButlerNew York Court of Appeals · 1886
- Frear v. LewisAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1922
- Piedmont Hotel Co. v. A. E. Nettleton Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1934
- Schintzuis v. . Lackawanna Steel Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1918
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Valladares v. ValladaresAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1981
- Blake v. WeidenNew York Court of Appeals · 1943
- In Re Latham Lithographic CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1939
- Betz v. Hearin Tank LinesLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1954
- Harley v. HarleyNew York Supreme Court · 1959
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.