Legal Opinion
Conklin Limestone Co. v. Linden
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided November 2, 1964PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtTaylor, J.
The primary question presented by this appeal is whether or not plaintiff, a foreign corporation, concededly *64not having qualified to do business here may maintain an action to recover for goods sold and delivered to defendant between March 20, 1960 and September 8, 1960. (General Corporation Law, §§ 210, 218.)
Finding that the action was barred by statute the County Court of Columbia County dismissed the complaint. From the resultant judgment plaintiff appeals. A protective appeal is also taken from the order denying its motion for judgment on the pleadings pursuant to rule 112 of the Buies of…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Browning v. City of WaycrossSupreme Court of the United States · 1914
- Penn Collieries Co. v. . McKeeverNew York Court of Appeals · 1905
- Sterling Novelty Corp. v. Frank & Hirsch Distributing Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1949
3Cited by15 opinions
- Netherlands Shipmortgage Corporation, Ltd. v. Mark Madias and Nicholas T.K. SkarvelisCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1983
- Alicanto, S. A. v. WoolvertonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1987
- Von Arx, A. G. v. BreitensteinAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1976
- Great White Whale Advertising, Inc. v. First Festival ProductionsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1981
- Nasso v. SeagalDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 2003
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.