Legal Opinion
Shostack v. Haskell
New York Supreme Court
Decided September 15, 1921PublishedCited by 5 opinions
Motion to cancel lis pendens.
1Opinion of the CourtCropsey, J.
This action affects eight pieces of property in which the plaintiff claims an interest. The complaint alleges that these parcels were con*476veyed to different persons in fraud of plaintiff's rights. One of the parcels was conveyed to defendant Weitz, who makes this motion. The principal defendant was promptly served and thereafter difficulty was encountered in making service upon the other defendants, including the moving defendant who is said to be the janitor of the principal defendant. The process server visited her home more than ten times during the two months immediately following the…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Mills v. . BlissNew York Court of Appeals · 1873
- Beman v. . ToddNew York Court of Appeals · 1891
- Cohen v. BiberAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1908
- Cohen v. RatkowskyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1899
- Levy v. KonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1906
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Israelson v. BradleyNew York Court of Appeals · 1955
- Gargano v. RubinAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1987
- 17th Avenue & 73rd Street Corp. v. Ocean Operating Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1926
- Israelson v. BradleyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1954
- Shostack v. HaskellAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1922