Legal Opinion

Glynn v. United Steel Works Corp.

New York Supreme Court

Decided August 14, 1935PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

McLaughlin (Alonzo G.), J.

The motion to strike out so much of the amended answer as denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the allegations contained in paragraphs of the complaint designated second, third and sixth as sham and frivolous is granted. The defendant certainly has knowledge as to whether or not in the latter part of 1933 or the early part of 1934 certain other corporations organized under the laws of the German Beich were merged into or with the defendant Gelsenkirchen Mining Corporation, and whether since said merger the defendants have changed the…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Union National Bank of Chicago v. ChapmanNew York Court of Appeals · 1902
  2. Dyke v. Erie Railway Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1871
  3. Dahlstrom v. . GemunderNew York Court of Appeals · 1910
  4. Cunningham v. Pressed Steel Car Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1933
  5. Second Russian Insurance v. MillerSupreme Court of the United States · 1925

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co. v. Siemens & Halske AktiengesellschaftDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1936
  2. Deutsch v. GutehoffnungshutteNew York Supreme Court · 1938
  3. Perkins v. De WittNew York Supreme Court · 1949
  4. Herzfeld v. National City BankCity of New York Municipal Court · 1940
  5. Finn v. BrownNew York Supreme Court · 1938

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API