STEINBECK
v.
GEROSA, COMPTROLLER OF NEW YORK CITY, ET AL.
STEINBECK
GEROSA, COMPTROLLER OF NEW YORK CITY, ET AL.
358 U.S. 39
Supreme Court of the United States (1958)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases
Per_curiam
Per Curiam.
The motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.
Mr. Justice Black is of the opinion that probable jurisdiction should be noted.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Mallis v. Bankers Tr. Co., 717 F.2d 683 (2d Cir. 1983)…ce of “a mutual promise or undertaking of the parties to share in the profits .. . and submit to the burden of making good the losses.” Steinbeck v. Gerosa, 4 N.Y.2d 302, 317, 175 N.Y.S.2d 1, 151 N.E. 2d 170 (emphasis in original), appeal dismissed, 358 U.S. 39, 79 S.Ct. 64, 3 L.Ed.2d 45 (1958); see Buchner v. Pines Hotel, Inc., 87 A.D.2d 691, 692, 488 N.Y.S.2d 870 (3d Dep’t 1982), aff'd mem., 58 N.Y.2d 1019, 462 N.Y.S.2d 436, 448 N.E. 2d 1347 (1983); Demian, Ltd. v. Charles A. Frank Associates, 671 F. 2d…