Corporations
Bella Smigel and Sebastian Smigel, Respondents, v. Meyer London Corporation, Defendant, Impleaded with Sol Halpern, Ethel Halpern and Murray Kalish, Appellants; Bella Smigel and Sebastian Smigel, Appellants, v. Meyer London Corporation and Ethel Halpern, Defendants, Impleaded with Sol Halpern and Murray Kalish, Respondents
262 A.D. 849·New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division·1941·NY
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
Bella Smigel and Sebastian Smigel, Respondents, v. Meyer London Corporation, Defendant, Impleaded with Sol Halpern, Ethel Halpern and Murray Kalish, Appellants. Bella Smigel and Sebastian Smigel, Appellants, v. Meyer London Corporation and Ethel Halpern, Defendants, Impleaded with Sol Halpern and Murray Kalish, Respondents.
[MAJORITY]
Motion to vacate order of this court dated March 21, 1941, in the first above-entitled appeal, granting reargument of the second above-entitled appeal; consolidating both appeals and directing that they be heard at the same time, or in the alternative granting leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals from the decision of reversal of the second appeal, certifying certain questions of law have arisen, which ought to be reviewed by the Court of Appeals, denied, with ten dollars costs. [See ante, p. 829.] Present —- Martin, P. J., Townley, Dore, Cohn and Callahan, JJ.