Legal Opinion

Cannon v. Cannon

New York Supreme Court

Decided September 30, 1939PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCross, J.

This is a motion under subdivision 5 of rule 306 of the Rules of Civil Practice of this State for judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that it does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action.

The plaintiff alleges in his complaint:

1. That he is fifteen years of age.

2. That he is the unemancipated son of the defendant Harvey P. Cannon and Grace B. Cannon, deceased, whose estate is also a defendant.

3. That he resided with the said Harvey P. Cannon and the said Grace B. Cannon, deceased, at the time of the incidents alleged in the complaint.

4. That on or about April 16,…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Rozell v. RozellNew York Court of Appeals · 1939
  2. Sorrentino v. SorrentinoNew York Court of Appeals · 1928

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Cannon v. CannonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1940
  2. Cannon v. CannonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1940

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

Powered by the Exa API