Legal Opinion

Schieman v. Schieman

New York Supreme Court

Decided August 13, 1956Published

1Opinion of the CourtSaul S. Stheit, J.

The defendant in this motion to dismiss this amended complaint for a separation invokes rules 102, 103 and 280 of the Rules of Civil Practice.

The complaint sets forth three causes of action, the first purporting to incorporate subdivisions 1 and 2 of section 1161 of the Civil Practice Act, the second for failure to support, and the third for abandonment.

It is the first cause of action alone to which defendant directs our attention, and more particularly to a number of paragraphs contained therein which defendant contends do not comply with the requirements of rule 280 with respect to alleging…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Gerseta Corp. v. Silk Ass'nAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1927
  2. Nasmie Construction Co. v. QuasmanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1925
  3. Zirn v. BradleyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1945
  4. Shanik v. ShanikNew York Supreme Court · 1955

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

Powered by the Exa API