Marine Midland Bank v. Stukey
Marine Midland Bank v. Edwin J. Stukey
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
OPINION OF THE COURT
Order affirmed, with costs, for the reasons stated in the memorandum at the Appellate Division ( 75 AD2d 713 ). So far as the stay of execution of the judgment pending disposition of the counterclaims is concerned, under all the circumstances, we cannot say that its grant by the Appellate Division was an abuse of discretion as a matter of law (see Chrysler Corp. v Fedders Corp., 51 NY2d 953, 955 ).
Concur: Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Meyer.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 7 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Most recent
- 767 Third Avenue LLC v. ORIX Capital Markets, LLC
- Friends Lumber, Inc. v. Cornell Development Corp.
- Koppell v. Long Island Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Children
- Edison Stone Corp. v. 42nd Street Development Corp.
- Western New York Geological Services, Inc. v. Mauro
- Marine Midland Bank, N.A. v. Mitchell
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.