Legal Opinion

More v. . Rand

New York Court of Appeals

Decided March 23, 1875PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The judge on the trial refused to allow the defendants to prove the facts alleged in their answer as a counter-claim, on the ground that the cause of action for the fraudulent representation of the plaintiff, whereby the defendants were induced to enter into the contract of September 17, 1869, and to purchase the interest of Holley in the lease, furniture and business of the St. Cloud Hotel, did not arise out of the contract or transaction, upon which the complaint is founded, and was not connected with the subject of the action. The action is brought for the dissolution of a copartnership…

2Cited by11 opinions

  1. Peuser v. MarshAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1915
  2. Gilliam v. LoebMissouri Court of Appeals · 1908
  3. Troster v. DannAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1913
  4. Reeves v. BushbyNew York Supreme Court · 1898
  5. Wilkinson v. DoddNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1885

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API