Legal Opinion

Smith v. Mangin

New York City Court

Decided December 3, 1936PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtPette, J.

Plaintiff makes this motion for summary judgment under rule 113 et seq. of the Rules of Civil Practice.

Originally this action was instituted by the service of a summons bearing an indorsement stating that the cause of action was based upon a judgment procured by the plaintiff against the defendant in the State of New Jersey, arising out of a confession of judgment pursuant to a power of attorney embodied in a bond and mortgage executed by the defendant for a good and valuable consideration. Judgment was filed on the 24th day of January, 1936, in New Jersey, and the present action was…

2Cases cited27 opinions

  1. Weisel v. Hagdahl Realty Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1934
  2. Frank v. . DavisNew York Court of Appeals · 1892
  3. Gardner v. . ClarkNew York Court of Appeals · 1860
  4. Dresdner v. Goldman Sachs Trading Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1934
  5. Porter v. . KingsburyNew York Court of Appeals · 1879

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Roseleaf Corp. v. ChierighinoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1963

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

Powered by the Exa API