Legal Opinion
Coutts v. J. L. Kraft & Bros.
New York Supreme Court
Decided September 15, 1922PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtCropsey, J.
Plaintiffs move for judgment under rule 113 of the Rules of Civil Practice. The first question presented is whether such a motion will lie upon the facts here presented. While there are denials in the pleadings most of them have disappeared as the result of the affidavits. In fact in defendant’s brief it is stated: *261“ There is practically no question of fact except as to whether the defendant entered into possession of the property,” and “ The only other question of fact is whether the plaintiffs, if they are entitled to recover any sum at all, are entitled to recover the amount claimed in the…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Genet v. President of the Delaware & Hudson Canal Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1893
- Moses v. . BierlingNew York Court of Appeals · 1865
- General Investment Co. v. Interborough Rapid Transit Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1922
- Weir v. BarkerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1905
- Agricultural Ins. Co. v. . BarnardNew York Court of Appeals · 1884
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Fadden v. Cambridge Mutual Fire InsuranceNew York Supreme Court · 1966
- Roer Construction Corp. v. City of New RochelleNew York Supreme Court · 1954
- Goodwill Advertising Co. v. State Liquor AuthorityNew York Supreme Court · 1962
- 59 Madison Avenue Corp. v. BauerCity of New York Municipal Court · 1958
- Rotenbach v. YoungNew York Supreme Court · 1922
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.