Tuma v. Piepenbrink
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Appeal by the plaintiffs, Frank W. Turna and others, as trustees, from an interlocutory judgment of the Supreme Court, in favor of the defendant, entered in the office of the clerk of the .county of Suffolk on the 23d day of July, 1912, upon the decision of the court after a trial at the Suffolk Special Term, and also from an order entered in said clerk’s office on the 1st day of August, 1913, denying plaintiffs’ motion for leave to serve an amended complaint.
1Opinion of the Court
Thomas, J.:
The appeal is from an interlocutory judgment sustaining demurrer to the complaint, and from an order in effect denying permission to serve an amended complaint. It was decided that the plaintiffs have neither legal capacity to sue nor a cause of action.*
The town of Islip is the owner of lands within Great South bay and the ocean, title whereof came by cession from the town of Huntington in 1818, and also by cession from the State of Hew York by chapter 503 of the Laws of 1857, which contained the following provision: “ § 3. The electors of the town of Islip shall, at the annual…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Bridges v. . B'd Supervisors of Sullivan Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1883
- Town of Hempstead v. LawrenceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1910
- Tuma v. PiepenbrinkNew York Supreme Court · 1912
3Cited by4 opinions
- Sammis v. Town of HuntingtonNew York Supreme Court · 1918
- Town of Islip v. . Estates of Havemeyer PointNew York Court of Appeals · 1918
- Saile v. EdellNew York Supreme Court · 1916
- Town of Islip v. Estates of Havemeyer PointAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1916