Legal Opinion

Deyo v. Adams

New York Supreme Court

Decided June 23, 1942PublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHooley, J.

Motion to dismiss the complaint under rule 106 of the Rules of Civil Practice upon the ground that it appears on the face of said complaint (a) that it fails to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action; (b) that the plaintiff has not legal capacity to sue or, in the alternative, to require plaintiff to separately state and number each cause of action.

The action is brought by Ann Deyo, as executrix of the estate of William J. Deyo, deceased, who seeks to recover for the estate certain United States Savings Bonds. Plaintiff was married to William J. Deyo on December 5, 1939. He…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. McCarthy v. PieretNew York Court of Appeals · 1939
  2. Decker v. FowlerWashington Supreme Court · 1939

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. Edds v. Mitchell, Admr.Texas Supreme Court · 1945
  2. Conrad v. ConradCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1944
  3. In re the Estate of DeyoNew York Surrogate's Court · 1943
  4. Ervin v. . Conn and Bank v. . FredericksonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1945
  5. Barton v. HookerSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1955

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

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

Powered by the Exa API