Legal Opinion
Schisgall v. Fairchild Publications, Inc.
New York Supreme Court
Decided January 13, 1955PublishedCited by 18 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtMatthew M. Levy, J.
This is a motion by the defendant for a number of items of relief in an omnibus attack upon the complaint: (1) to compel the plaintiffs separately to state and number the causes set out in the first and in the second causes of action (Rules Civ. Prac., rule 90); (2) to strike out irrelevant matter (Rules Civ. Prac., rule 103); and (3) to dismiss the third, fourth and fifth causes of action for insufficiency in law (Rules Civ. Prac., rule 106).
In considering the first phase of the first branch of the motion, I shall state only the substance of the relevant allegations of the first cause of…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Wood v. . Duff-GordonNew York Court of Appeals · 1917
- Advance Music Corp. v. American Tobacco Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1946
- Rich v. New York Central & Hudson River RailroadNew York Court of Appeals · 1882
- Cullings v. GoetzNew York Court of Appeals · 1931
- Rager v. McCloskeyNew York Court of Appeals · 1953
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Leigh Furniture and Carpet Co. v. IsomUtah Supreme Court · 1982
- North Shore Bottling Co. v. C. Schmidt & Sons, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1968
- Harsha v. State Savings BankSupreme Court of Iowa · 1984
- Nifty Foods Corporation v. The Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Company, Inc. And Pet IncorporatedCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1980
- Wampler v. PalmertonOregon Supreme Court · 1968
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.