Legal Opinion
Girard v. 94th Street and Fifth Avenue Corp.
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided June 30, 1975No. 75 Civ. 646PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
WARD, District Judge.
Defendants, 94th Street and Fifth Avenue Corporation (“the corporation”) and the members of its board of directors, individually, move to dismiss the complaint pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6), Fed.R.Civ.P., for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, or in the alternative, for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56, Fed.R.Civ.P., on ground of res judicata. Since matters outside the pleadings have been presented to and not excluded by the Court, the Rule 12(b)(6) motion will be treated as one for summary judgment.
In 1968, during their marriage,…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- United Mine Workers of America v. GibbsSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Bell v. HoodSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
- Griffin v. BreckenridgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Jackson v. Metropolitan Edison Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Shelley v. KraemerSupreme Court of the United States · 1948
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Barbara Girard v. 94th Street and Fifth Avenue CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1976
- Dupree v. Hertz Corp.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1976
- Schreiner v. McKENZIE TANK LINES, ETC.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1982
- Garg v. Albany Industrial Development AgencyDistrict Court, N.D. New York · 1995
- Kops v. New York Telephone Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1978
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.