From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

220-2 East 85th St., Inc. v. Fastenberg

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 2, 1961
13 A.D.2d 724 (N.Y. App. Div. 1961)

Opinion

May 2, 1961


Judgment unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the action remanded to Special Term to make findings as to the disputed factual issues. The findings of the court do not adequately comply with section 440 of the Civil Practice Act, which requires the decision of the court to state the essential facts. ( Hurwitz v. Hurwitz, 3 A.D.2d 1009; Steel Co. of So. Cal. v. Associated Metals Mins. Corp., 277 App. Div. 687; Mason v. Lory Dress Co., 277 App. Div. 660.)

Concur — Valente, J.P., McNally, Stevens and Eager, JJ.


Summaries of

220-2 East 85th St., Inc. v. Fastenberg

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 2, 1961
13 A.D.2d 724 (N.Y. App. Div. 1961)
Case details for

220-2 East 85th St., Inc. v. Fastenberg

Case Details

Full title:220-2 EAST 85TH ST., INC., et al., Appellants, v. MARVIN FASTENBERG et…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: May 2, 1961

Citations

13 A.D.2d 724 (N.Y. App. Div. 1961)

Citing Cases

Power v. Falk

The opinion of Special Term states that it constitutes the decision under section 440 of the Civil Practice…

Matter of Harris v. Doley

Therefore, the decision of the court determining such a proceeding following a trial should state the facts…