Case Name: Hearst Corporation, as Successor in Interest to Hearst Consolidated Publications, Inc., Respondent, v. Hertz Corporation, Appellant. (Action No. 1.); Hearst Corporation, as Successor in Interest to Hearst Consolidated Publications, Inc., Respondent, v. Hertz Corporation, Appellant, and Hartford Accident and Indemnity Company et al., Respondents. (Action No. 2.)
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1980-05-06
Citations: 49 N.Y.2d 1031
Docket Number: 
Parties: Hearst Corporation, as Successor in Interest to Hearst Consolidated Publications, Inc., Respondent, v Hertz Corporation, Appellant. (Action No. 1.) Hearst Corporation, as Successor in Interest to Hearst Consolidated Publications, Inc., Respondent, v Hertz Corporation, Appellant, and Hartford Accident and Indemnity Company et al., Respondents. (Action No. 2.)
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Reports
Volume: 49
Pages: 1031–1031

Head Matter:
Hearst Corporation, as Successor in Interest to Hearst Consolidated Publications, Inc., Respondent, v Hertz Corporation, Appellant. (Action No. 1.) Hearst Corporation, as Successor in Interest to Hearst Consolidated Publications, Inc., Respondent, v Hertz Corporation, Appellant, and Hartford Accident and Indemnity Company et al., Respondents. (Action No. 2.)
Submitted April 21, 1980;
decided May 6, 1980

Opinion:
Motion for leave to appeal dismissed upon the ground that the order sought to be appealed from does not finally determine the action within the meaning of the Constitution (Cohen and Karger, Powers of the New York Court of Appeals, § 38, 39, 40).