Harkins v. Provenzo
New York Supreme Court
Demurrer by defendant to plaintiff’s complaint on the ground that it fails to state a cause of action.
1Opinion of the CourtWheeler, J.
The complaint is as follows: “ That during December, 1919, the above named Nicholas Provenzo, defendant’s intestate, was the holder of a liquor tax certificate under the laws of the State of New York and was engaged in the sale and traffic of spirituous liquors. That between the first day of December, 1919, and the 18th day of December, 1919, plaintiff purchased from defendant’s intestate at his place of business in the city of Buffalo, N. Y., certain spirituous liquors, to wit: gin and whiskey, which said liquors plaintiff did drink while upon the premises of defendant’s said intestate and…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Hegerich v. . KeddieNew York Court of Appeals · 1885
- Meekin v. Brooklyn Heights RailroadNew York Court of Appeals · 1900
- Wade v. . KalbfleischNew York Court of Appeals · 1874
- Sirkin v. Fourteenth Street StoreAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1908
- Busch v. Interborough Rapid Transit Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1907
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Ritchie v. Anchor Casualty Co.California Court of Appeal · 1955
- McClure v. JohnsonArizona Supreme Court · 1937
- In re the Estate of KilloughNew York Surrogate's Court · 1933
- Hinton v. Republic Aviation CorporationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1959
- Bernstein v. Queens County Jockey ClubAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1927
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.