This petition will be considered as an application which, in effect, seeks to mandamus a Judge of the Civil Court to fix an undertaking pending an appeal from a judgment of dispossess. The petitioner claims that such fixation is not a discretionary function but the Judge's absolute duty, as prescribed by CPLR 5519 (subd. [a], par. 6). The issue does not involve the discretion of the court of first instance
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Let's get started
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
MATTER OF OLECK v. PEARLMAN
49 Misc.2d 202 (1966)
In the Matter of Harvey Oleck, Petitioner, v. Murray H. Pearlman, Respondent.
Supreme Court, Special Term, Kings County.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
January 7, 1966
January 7, 1966
Attorney(s) appearing for the Case
Nydick & Ross for petitioner.
Supreme Court, Special Term, Kings County.
Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.
Cited Cases
- No Cases Found
Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.
