Rosenstock v. City of New York
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Appeal by the plaintiffs; Meyer Rosenstock and another, from a judgment of the Municipal Court of the city of New York in favor of the defendant, entered in the office- of the clerk of said court, sustaining a demurrer to the amended complaint.
1Opinion of the Court
Hirschberg, P. J.:
A demurrer to the original complaint was sustained by the Municipal Court of the city of New York on the ground that it did not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action, and that *10decision was affirmed on appeal. (See Rosenstock v. City of New York, 97 App, Div. 337.) We then held that the complaint was defective in not alleging the non-existence of a prior unsatisfied and outstanding execution similar in character to that' issued in behalf of the plaintiff. The complaint has been amended in the respect referred to, but the amended complaint has also- béen held…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Bliss v. . LawrenceNew York Court of Appeals · 1874
- Wallace v. LawyerIndiana Supreme Court · 1876
- Moran v. . Long Island CityNew York Court of Appeals · 1886
- Emes v. FowlerCity of New York Municipal Court · 1904
3Cited by4 opinions
- Manufacturers Trust Co. v. RossAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1937
- Osterhoudt v. StadeAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1909
- Jones v. NicollCity of New York Municipal Court · 1911
- Board of Higher Education v. CarterAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1962