General
John R. Vunk et al., Copartners, Practicing Law under the Name of Vunk & Carleton, Appellants, v. Norman W. Roe, Respondent
265 A.D. 1060·New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division·1943·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
John R. Vunk et al, Copartners, Practicing Law under the Name of Vunk & Carleton, Appellants, v. Norman W. Roe, Respondent.
[MAJORITY]
That the sum of $40,000 was allowed pursuant to order of the Surrogate’s Court of Suffolk County is conceded and is a matter of public record; and it is undisputed that such sum was actually received by plaintiffs. There is-no need for an examination to establish such facts. Close, P. J., Hagarty, Johnston, Adel and Lewis, JJ., concur.