Legal Opinion
Urtz v. . N.Y.C. H.R.R.R. Co.
New York Court of Appeals
Decided May 16, 1911PublishedCited by 68 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
[EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.]
[EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.] In an action for the recovery of damages caused by the fraud of the defendant, the plaintiff must allege and prove that he has been injured by the fraud which he charges. The essential constituents of the action are firmly fixed and are tersely stated in Arthur v. Griswold (55 N.Y. 400), as, "representation, falsity, scienter,…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Dung v. . ParkerNew York Court of Appeals · 1873
- Arthur v. . GriswoldNew York Court of Appeals · 1874
- Gould v. Cayuga County National BankNew York Court of Appeals · 1885
- Krumm v. . BeachNew York Court of Appeals · 1884
- Taylor v. . GuestNew York Court of Appeals · 1874
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by68 opinions
- Channel Master Corp. v. Aluminium Limited Sales, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1958
- Reno v. . BullNew York Court of Appeals · 1919
- Eastern Wine Corporation v. Winslow-Warren, Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1943
- Dress Shirt Sales, Inc. v. Hotel Martinique AssociatesNew York Court of Appeals · 1963
- Dickinson v. BurnhamCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1952
63 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.