Legal Opinion
Saso v. State
New York Supreme Court
Decided October 28, 1959PublishedCited by 20 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtArthur D. Brennan, J.
The State of New York and New York State Thruway Authority, two of the defendants in the above action, move to dismiss the second amended complaint herein (pursuant to Bules Civ. Prac., rule 106, subds. 1, 4) on the grounds that said complaint is legally insufficient and that the Supreme Court does not have jurisdiction of the subject of the action. In addition, and by way of further or alternate relief, said defendants also move' to dismiss the aforesaid complaint (pursuant to Bules Civ. Prac., rule 107, subds. 3, 5) on the grounds that there is another action pending between the same…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Fallbrook Irrigation District v. BradleySupreme Court of the United States · 1896
- Rindge Co. v. County of Los AngelesSupreme Court of the United States · 1923
- Missouri Pacific Railway Co. v. NebraskaSupreme Court of the United States · 1896
- Hairston v. Danville & Western Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1908
- Matter of N.Y. City H. Authority v. MullerNew York Court of Appeals · 1936
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Luther Knight v. State of New YorkCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1971
- Dowling College v. FlackeAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1980
- Greenwich Associates v. Metropolitan Transportation AuthorityAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1989
- Goodwill Advertising Co. v. State Liquor AuthorityNew York Supreme Court · 1962
- Leventhal v. MichaelisNew York Supreme Court · 1961
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.