Murphy v. Dickinson
New York Supreme Court
These are actions to set aside certain alleged fraudulent conveyances of real property situated in the county of New York. On the 2d day of June last, the defendants’ counsel obtained an order to show cause, from his Honor Justice Cardozo, returnable at chambers, why certain parts of the plaintiffs’ complaint should not be stricken out as irrelevant, or not be made more definite and certain.
Read the full summary
These are actions to set aside certain alleged fraudulent conveyances of real property situated in the county of New York. On the 2d day of June last, the defendants’ counsel obtained an order to show cause, from his Honor Justice Cardozo, returnable at chambers, why certain parts of the plaintiffs’ complaint should not be stricken out as irrelevant, or not be made more definite and certain. This motion, on the order to show cause, came on before his Honor Justice Ingraham, and his Honor denied the motion in part and granted it in part. That is, Judge Ingraham struck out some portion of the…
1Opinion of the Court
At a general term of the supreme court of the state of New York, held at the county court house in the city of New York, on the 7th day of June, A.D. 1870.
Present, Hon. George G. Barnard and Albert Cardozo, Justices.
Michael Murphy and others, respondents, agt. William C. Dickinson and Robert J. Gamble, appellants.
The appeal in this action from the order of his Honor, Justice Ingraham, made and entered herein on the 15th day of July,' 1869, denying the motion of defendants to strike out certain parts of plaintiff’s complaint as irrelevant or be made more definite and certain, coming on to be…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Rice v. First Division of the St. Paul & Pacific RailroadSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1878
- Morehouse v. YeagerThe Superior Court of New York City · 1874
- Geis v. LoewThe Superior Court of New York City · 1873