Case Name: Union Chelsea National Bank, Respondent, v. Rumican 190 Corporation et al., Appellants, et al., Defendants
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1999-07-06
Citations: 93 N.Y.2d 989
Docket Number: 
Parties: Union Chelsea National Bank, Respondent, v Rumican 190 Corporation et al., Appellants, et al., Defendants.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Reports
Volume: 93
Pages: 989–989

Head Matter:
Union Chelsea National Bank, Respondent, v Rumican 190 Corporation et al., Appellants, et al., Defendants.
Submitted May 24, 1999;
decided July 6, 1999

Opinion:
Motion, insofar as N. Marius Bucurescu seeks leave to appeal purportedly on behalf of Doina M. Bucurescu and Rumican 190 Corporation, dismissed upon the ground that N. Marius Bucurescu is not the authorized legal representative of said appellants and, as to Rumican 190 Corporation, cannot be its authorized legal representative (see, CPLR 321 [a]); motion for leave to appeal by N. Marius Bucurescu on his own behalf denied.