Legal Opinion
Dunscombe v. Crocker-Wheeler Electric Manufacturing Co.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided April 10, 1931PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtO’Malley, J.
The order appealed from granted the motion of the defendant Berg for judgment upon the pleadings and dismissed the complaint for insufficiency. The motion was based upon the complaint, answer and plaintiffs’ bill of particulars.
The action is in equity and from the allegations of the complaint the following facts must be deemed true. The defendant CrockerWheeler Manufacturing Company, hereinafter designated CrockerWheeler, is a stock corporation, of which the defendant Berg is a stockholder. The plaintiffs are stockbrokers, and the defendant Feuerstein one of their customers.
On October 22,…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Thompson v. . SimpsonNew York Court of Appeals · 1891
- Wilson v. . LittleNew York Court of Appeals · 1849
- Richardson v. . CrandallNew York Court of Appeals · 1872
- Reed v. CopelandSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1883
- Hall v. CayotCalifornia Supreme Court · 1903
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Inc. v. ScheiderNew York Supreme Court · 1972
- Suchy v. Frankenberg & American Cap Fronts Manufacturing Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1937
- Nutt v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1967
- Nutt v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1967
- Rudin v. SteinbuglerDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1938