Legal Opinion
Van Schaick v. Burney
New York Supreme Court
Decided July 12, 1932PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtCollins, J.
The defendant Martinson assails the legal sufficiency of the complaint. The plaintiff, Superintendent of Insurance, acting for the Equitable Casualty and Surety Company, in process of liquidation, seeks to recover damages by virtue of a liability having become fixed under a bond of the Equitable Casualty and Surety Company given to the Actors’ Equity Association, which *888bond guaranteed payment of certain salaries and expenses that might become due to certain actors and performers in connection with a production to be known as “ The Padlocks of 1927.”
Cotemporaneous with the execution of the…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Gilbert v. . WimanNew York Court of Appeals · 1848
- Maloney v. . NelsonNew York Court of Appeals · 1894
- Norris v. ReynoldsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1909
- Brown v. Mechanics & Traders' BankAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1899
3Cited by3 opinions
- Hakala v. SchaickCity of New York Municipal Court · 1939
- Van Schaick v. BurneyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1932
- W. T. Grant Co. v. Uneeda Doll Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1963