MATH v. MATH


28 A.D.2d 723 (1967)

Ruth Math, Respondent, v. Howard N. Math, Appellant

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

June 26, 1967


As so modified, order affirmed, with $25 costs and disbursements to respondent.

In our opinion, the order should have required defendant to pay the cost of offset printing or mimeographing on plaintiff's appeal (see, CPLR 5528, 5529; Rules of App. Div. 2d Dept., part I, rule I, subd. [3]), instead of the higher cost of printing. We have not reviewed the question of a counsel fee for plaintiff for the prosecution of her pending appeal from the judgment. That question...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

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.

Citing Cases