Legal Opinion

A, B, C, D, E, F, H, I, J, K, L v. Curran

New York Supreme Court

Decided July 14, 1969PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJohn T. Casey, J.

Before considering the merits of this proceeding, the determination of a threshold question is required. Neither the moving papers nor the petition contains the names of the petitioners; they are simply designated by letters of the alphabet. Prior to the hearing of the motion, however, their identity was revealed to the court. The respondents claim that such concealment renders the proceeding jurisdictionally defective. CPLR 2101 (subd. [c]) requires that “in a summons, a complaint or a judgment the title shall include the names of the parties J’ CPLR 2101 (subd. [f ]) states, however: “A…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Barenblatt v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1959
  2. Watkins v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
  3. In re Di BrizziNew York Court of Appeals · 1951
  4. Bonanno v. RyanNew York Supreme Court · 1959
  5. "Today's Peter Zenger!" v. County ClerkNew York Supreme Court · 1959

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Henry v. New York State Commission of InvestigationNew York Supreme Court · 1988
  2. Costiglio v. StrelzinNew York Supreme Court · 1978
  3. People v. SlochowskyNew York Supreme Court · 1982

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

Powered by the Exa API