Case ID: ad_240/html/0977-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Annibelo La Froscia and Marie La Froscia, His Wife, Appellants, v. Antonio Tudda and Others, Defendants, and Labor Associates, Inc., Respondent.
   Order vacating sale of property and directing a resale reversed on the law and the facts, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion denied, with ten dollars costs. In eur opinion, there was proof of proper service of a sufficient notice of sale upon the respondent’s attorney, and there is no proof that the property was bid in by plaintiffs for an inadequate price or that the respondent is prepared or intends to bid on the proposed resale. Lazansky, P. J., Young, Kapper, Carswell and Tompkins, JJ., concur.