Legal Opinion
Bachrach v. 1001 Tenants Corp.
New York Supreme Court
Decided December 27, 1963PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtSamuel H. Hofstadter, J.
This is a case of first impression. In effect, the gravamen of the complaint is that the contract by virtue of which the plaintiffs would become proprietary tenants of apartment 4-S of 1001 Park Avenue was frustrated by the defendants because the plaintiffs are members of the Jewish faith.
Defendants, other than defendants Hirst and Smith, move under rule 3211 (subd. [a], pars. 1, 2, 7) of the Civil Practice Law and Rules to dismiss the complaint.
The complaint sounds in prima facie tort. Since this court has jurisdiction of such causes of action, the motion under rule 3211 (subd. [a], par. 2)…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Hirabayashi v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
- Advance Music Corp. v. American Tobacco Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1946
- Holland v. EdwardsNew York Court of Appeals · 1954
- Opera on Tour, Inc. v. WeberNew York Court of Appeals · 1941
- Ruza v. RuzaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1955
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Cluett, Peabody & Co. v. New York State Division of Human RightsNew York Supreme Court · 1969
- Bachrach v. 1001 Tenants Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1964
- People v. GalamisonNew York Supreme Court · 1964