Administrative

Harry Litwin et al., Doing Business as Woodbourne Landscape Co., Respondents, v. Grand Central Apartments Inc., Appellant

16 A.D.2d 800·New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division·1962·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

Harry Litwin et al., Doing Business as Woodbourne Landscape Co., Respondents, v. Grand Central Apartments Inc., Appellant. [MAJORITY] Motion by respondents for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals, denied. Kleinfeld, Acting P. J., Brennan, Hill, Rabin and Hopkins, JJ., concur.

Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.