From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mulligan v. Wetchler, City of New York

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Jul 7, 1972
30 N.Y.2d 951 (N.Y. 1972)

Opinion

Submitted June 26, 1972

Decided July 7, 1972

Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department, CHARLES A. LORETO, J.

W. Bernard Richland for motion.

J. Lee Rankin, Corporation Counsel ( Bernard Burstein of counsel), opposed.


Motion granted and the appeal dismissed, with costs and $10 costs of motion, upon the grounds that the Appellate Division order did not direct modification of the judgment appealed from in a substantial respect and that defendant is not aggrieved by the modification (CPLR 5601, subd. [a], par. [iii]; and see Weinberg v. Wishweg Realty Corp., 29 N.Y.2d 648; Amadeus, Inc. v. State of New York, 29 N.Y.2d 634; and that the dissent is not upon a stated question of law (CPLR 5601, subd. [a], par. [i]).


Summaries of

Mulligan v. Wetchler, City of New York

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Jul 7, 1972
30 N.Y.2d 951 (N.Y. 1972)
Case details for

Mulligan v. Wetchler, City of New York

Case Details

Full title:MARY MULLIGAN, as Administratrix of the Estate of BERNARD MULLIGAN…

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Jul 7, 1972

Citations

30 N.Y.2d 951 (N.Y. 1972)
335 N.Y.S.2d 701
287 N.E.2d 391

Citing Cases

Yonkers City Post No. 1666 v. Josanth Realty Corp.

The order of the Appellate Division should be reversed, with costs, and the case remitted to it for further…

Tucker v. City of New York

We note further that the court below erred in computations. Six per cent interest is to be assessed on the…