Kosolapov v. Russo-Asiatic Bank
New York Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtHumphrey, J.
This is a motion to dismiss the two causes of action in the amended complaint on the ground that each is barred by the six-year Statute of Limitations.
Some of the facts relating to this rather protrated litigation are as follows: The action was brought originally by one James A. Tillman upon three causes of action set forth in the complaint. The third cause of action therein set forth is alleged to have been assigned to Tillman by Michael P. Kosolapov, and is the one here involved. One of the other causes of action was based upon a claim also assigned to Tillman by a third party. The action…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Harriss v. TamsNew York Court of Appeals · 1932
- Clark v. DalesNew York Supreme Court · 1855
- Isenberg v. RainierAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1911
- Weed v. . SpearsNew York Court of Appeals · 1908
- Fish v. ConleyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1927
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Anglo California National Bank v. KleinNew York Supreme Court · 1936
- In re the Estate of TonkonogoffNew York Surrogate's Court · 1941
- Kosolapov v. Russo-Asiatic BankAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1933