Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)

BEN BIMBERG CO., INC., and Others, Plaintiffs, v. UNITY COAT APRON CO., INC., Defendant. Affd., 240 A.D. 959. See, also, 150 Misc. 836; 151 id. 442.

SCHMUCK, J.

Motion denied. Section 476 of the Civil Practice Act and rule 112 of the Rules of Civil Practice can avail the defendant naught. The complaint states facts establishing a violation of section 44 Pers. Prop. of the Personal Property Law. Alleging that a sale was made of fixtures, machinery, merchandise, delivery trucks and established good will, it predicates a sale in bulk within the meaning of section 44 Pers. Prop. of the Personal Property Law. Regardless of the interpretation and definition of what constitutes a sale in bulk by foreign jurisdictions, and considering the rule laid down by the appellate courts in this State, it would seem that the complaint alleging a sale in bulk of an entire business together with the fixtures, machinery and good will shows a sale within section 44. ( Mott v. Reeves, 125 Misc. 511.)

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

BIMBERG CO., INC., v. UNITY COAT APRON
(May 3, 1933)