Legal Opinion
Ballin v. Larkin
New York Supreme Court
Decided February 4, 1970PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtMario Pittoni, J.
Defendant trustees Glogower, Margouleff, Kagan, Barkin and Seeman, defendant Village Attorney Bentley, and defendant village move to dismiss the second cause of action pursuant to CPLR 3211 (subd. [a], par. 7) on the ground that its allegations are insufficient in law.
Even though the caption says that these defendants are being sued “ individually and as trustees,” the complaint merely refers to them and their activities as trustees.
The claim against these defendants is that they conspired among themselves and with other defendants to deprive plaintiff of certain right, title and interest in…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Winter v. . City of Niagara FallsNew York Court of Appeals · 1907
- Derlicka v. LeoNew York Court of Appeals · 1939
- Arnold v. Village of North TarrytownAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1910
- Hicks Development Corp. v. Incorporated Village of LawrenceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1953
- Arnold v. . Village of North TarrytownNew York Court of Appeals · 1911
3Cited by3 opinions
- Franks v. KohlSupreme Court of Iowa · 1979
- Franks v. KohlSupreme Court of Iowa · 1979
- Mazo v. Town of ShawangunkNew York Supreme Court · 1976