Case Name: In the Matter of the Application of William H. Hotchkiss, as Superintendent of Insurance of the State of New York, Respondent, to Take Possession of the Property and to Conduct the Business of The New York and New England Underwriters at Lloyds of New York City, an Unincorporated Association of Individual Underwriters, Composed of Edward Pergoli and Others, Appellant
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1910-06-03
Citations: 138 A.D. 880
Docket Number: Appeal No. 3
Parties: In the Matter of the Application of William H. Hotchkiss, as Superintendent of Insurance of the State of New York, Respondent, to Take Possession of the Property and to Conduct the Business of The New York and New England Underwriters at Lloyds of New York City, an Unincorporated Association of Individual Underwriters, Composed of Edward Pergoli and Others, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 138
Pages: 880–880

Head Matter:
In the Matter of the Application of William H. Hotchkiss, as Superintendent of Insurance of the State of New York, Respondent, to Take Possession of the Property and to Conduct the Business of The New York and New England Underwriters at Lloyds of New York City, an Unincorporated Association of Individual Underwriters, Composed of Edward Pergoli and Others, Appellant.
(Appeal No. 3.)
First Department,
June 3, 1910.
See head note in Matter of Hotchhiss, No. 2 (ante, p. 877).
‘ Appeal by The New York and Hew England Underwriters at Lloyds Of. New York City from an order of the Supreme Court, made at the New York Special Term and entered in the office of the clerk of the county of New York on the 25th day of August, 1909, restraining the appellant from, changing its name.
Holmes Jones, for the appellant.
Amos H. Stephens, Deputy Attorney-General, for the respondent.

Opinion:
Scott,, J.:
The appeal should be dismissed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, for the reasons stated in Matter of Hotchkiss, No. 2 (138 App. Div. 877), decided herewith.
Ingraham, P. J., McLaughlin, Clarke and Dowling, JJ., concurred. .
Appeal dismissed, with -ten dollars costs and disbursements.