Bankers Surety Co. v. . Meyer
New York Court of Appeals
Appeal, by permission, from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered November IT, 1911, which reversed an order of Special Term denying a motion by plaintiff for judgment on the pleadings and granted said motion, with leave to defendants to withdraw their demurrer and serve an answer.
Read the full summary
Appeal, by permission, from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered November IT, 1911, which reversed an order of Special Term denying a motion by plaintiff for judgment on the pleadings and granted said motion, with leave to defendants to withdraw their demurrer and serve an answer. The following question was certified: “Does the complaint state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action ? ” The nature of the action and the facts, so far as material, are stated in the opinion. The plaintiff has a remedy at law, which, although…
1Opinion of the CourtHiscock, J.
The motion for judgment in this case was . made on the complaint and demurrer thereto, and presents the question whether the complaint sets forth a cause of action.
Aside from formal allegations it alleges that the plaintiff is the owner and holder of five promissory notes in the sum of $1,200 each, made by defendants’ intestate and payable with interest, one note on or before December 15th in each year commencing in 1914; that on or about November, 9, 1909 plaintiff presented its claim on said notes to defendants as administrator and administratrix, respectively, of the estate of the maker of…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Blood v. . KaneNew York Court of Appeals · 1892
- Hard v. LeurendusNew York Court of Appeals · 1890
- Haddow v. . LundyNew York Court of Appeals · 1874
- In re the Final Judicial Settlement of the Account of Proceedings of SmithAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1907
- Post v. IngrahamAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1907
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- In re the Estate of RothkoNew York Court of Appeals · 1977
- Lawrence v. . LittlefieldNew York Court of Appeals · 1915
- Joost v. CastelCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1939
- In re the Estate of BaldwinNew York Surrogate's Court · 1935
- Schley v. DonlinNew York Supreme Court · 1927
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.