Legal Opinion

Fraser v. Copake Lake Pure Ice Corp.

New York Supreme Court

Decided May 5, 1926PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDike, J.

This is a motion under section 949 of the Civil Practice Act to vacate a warrant of attachment “ only upon the papers upon which the warrant was granted.” The relief is sought on the ground that the complaint does not set forth any of the causes of action stated in sections 902 and 904 of the Civil Practice Act, and that the complaint does not state any sufficient cause of action. Relief under rule 106,. subdivision 5, is asked.

There are two causes of action set forth in the complaint. The first cause of action is for the recovery of the purchase price of stock in the defendant corporation,…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Vail v. . ReynoldsNew York Court of Appeals · 1890
  2. Battle v. . CoitNew York Court of Appeals · 1863
  3. Dexter & Carpenter, Inc. v. Lake & Export Coal Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1921
  4. Youngman v. SmadbeckAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1909

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Mason v. MadsonMontana Supreme Court · 1931
  2. Fraser v. Copake Lake Pure Ice Corp.New York Supreme Court · 1926

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API