Opinion · Nylaw New York

TURYANSKY v. FINEBERG, 240 App. Div. 916 (1933)

WILLIAM TURYANSKY, as Adm’r, Adm’x, etc., of JACOB TURYANSKY, Deceased,Respondent, v. HARRY FINEBERG (FEINBERG), Appellant., 240 A.D. 916 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department. 1933)

Type: Opinion
Court: Nylaw New York
Jurisdiction: Nylaw
Date: 1933-01-01
Topic: general

TURYANSKY v. FINEBERG, 240 App. Div. 916 (1933) WILLIAM TURYANSKY, as Administrator, etc., of JACOB TURYANSKY, Deceased,Respondent, v. HARRY FINEBERG (FEINBERG), Appellant.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department. November, 1933.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed TURYANSKY v. FINEBERG, 240 App. Div. 916 (1933). The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

TURYANSKY v. FINEBERG,240 App. Div. 916(1933)

WILLIAM TURYANSKY, as Administrator, etc., of JACOB TURYANSKY, Deceased,

Respondent, v. HARRY FINEBERG (FEINBERG), Appellant.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department.

November, 1933.

Judgment unanimously affirmed, with costs. No opinion.

Present — Lazansky, P.J., Young, Hagarty, Tompkins and Davis, JJ.