Legal Opinion

Rosenstock v. Laue

New York Supreme Court

Decided April 15, 1910Published

Demubbeb to a separate defense.

1Opinion of the CourtGiegerich, J.

The plaintiffs demur upon the ground of insufficiency to a separate defense set up in the answer. The action is based upon an alleged violation by the defendant of section 22 of the building code of the city of Hew York in making an excavation on his ground for building purposes to a depth of more than ten feet below the curb without preserving from injury and properly supporting the wall of the adjoining building owned by the plaintiffs. The defense demurred to, so far as it is material to quote it, alleges that the defendant entered into a contract with one Duffy whereby the latter agreed…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Dorrity v. . RappNew York Court of Appeals · 1878
  2. Post v. KerwinAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1909
  3. Bernheimer v. KilpatrickNew York Supreme Court · 1889
  4. Paltey v. EganAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1907
  5. Cohen v. SimmonsNew York Supreme Court · 1892

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

Powered by the Exa API