Legal Opinion
Estruch v. Volkswagenwerk, AG.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided November 4, 1983No. Appeal No. 3PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Order unanimously affirmed, without costs. Memorandum: Inasmuch as the individual claims for damages under subdivision (h) of section 349 and subdivision 3 of section 350-d of the General Business Law have been found to be without merit plaintiffs may not, as representatives, maintain a class action based on those sections (see CPLR 901, subd a, par 3; McLaughlin, Practice Commentaries, McKinney’s Cons Laws of NY, Book 7B, CPLR C901:4; Kindel v Kaufman & Broad Homes, 67 AD2d 938; Rapp v Dime Sav. Bank, 64 AD2d 964, affd 48 NY2d 658); thus, the class causes of action were properly dismissed.…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Rapp v. Dime Sav. Bank of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1979
- Rapp v. Dime Savings BankAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1978
- Kindel v. Kaufman & Broad Homes of Long Island, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1979
3Cited by5 opinions
- Gridley v. Turnbury Vil., LLCAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2021
- Coffey v. United States Gypsum Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1989
- Funderburke v. Uniondale Union Free School District No. 15New York Supreme Court · 1997
- Burns v. Volkswagen of America, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1983
- Miramontes v. Ralph Lauren CorporationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2023