Hyperlawhypertext legal database Silk v. Bowery Savings Bank 263 A.D. 951

← Cases

Silk v. Bowery Savings Bank

263 A.D. 951 Court N.Y. App. Div. Decision date 1942-02-27 Docket Appeal No. 1; Appeal No. 2 English

Contents

Majority

p. 951
William H. Silk, Respondent, v. The Bowery Savings Bank and James A. Stenhouse, Appellants, Valden Realty Corporation and Others, Defendants and Appellants Eighty-five Park Avenue Corporation and Conoco Corporation, Defendants.
(Appeal No. 1) (Appeal No. 2),

Order entered January 21, 1942, denying motion for a prior and separate trial of certain issues,

p. 952
unanimously reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and the motion granted. No opinion. Settle order on notice. Present — Martin, P. J., Townley, Dore, Cohn and Callahan, JJ.