Legal Opinion

In re the Estate of Vought

New York Surrogate's Court

Decided July 12, 1972PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

S. Samuel Di Falco, S.

There are four separate actions which seek identical relief against the estate fiduciary, viz: to impress a trust; for breach of contract; for restitution. The defendant moves: (a) to dismiss each complaint pursuant to CPLB. 3211 (subd. [a], pars. 1, 5, 7) upon the grounds that a defense is founded upon documentary evidence; the actions are barred by the doctrines of collateral estoppel and res judicata and by the Statute of Limitations; and that the complaints fail to state causes of action; (b) for summary judgment. Plaintiff cross-moves for summary judgment in all…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Hobbs v. McLeanSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
  2. Minot v. MinotMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1946
  3. Mandel v. LiebmanNew York Court of Appeals · 1951
  4. Hartley v. . Eagle Insurance Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1918
  5. Kelly v. KellyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1938

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Moffat v. LynchSupreme Court of Missouri · 1982
  2. Brooklyn Union Gas Co. v. JimenizCivil Court of the City of New York · 1975
  3. In re the Estate of VoughtNew York Surrogate's Court · 1973
  4. Reimann v. Saturday Evening Post Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1979
  5. Moffat v. LynchSupreme Court of Missouri · 1982

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

Powered by the Exa API