Legal Opinion

Ohlquist v. Nordstrom

New York Supreme Court

Decided April 19, 1932PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMacGregor, J.

This action was brought to recover damages for injuries sustained by the plaintiff against the defendants as joint tort feasors. A judgment was rendered against both. The judgment was affirmed upon appeal. The defendant Hickman has paid the judgment and now seeks to recover judgment against the defendant Nordstrom for one-half of the judgment. He seeks to do this by means of a motion pursuant to the provisions of section 211-a of the Civil Practice Act which provides: “ Such recovery may be had in a separate [‘action; or where the parties have appeared in the original action, a judgment may…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Jacobus v. . ColgateNew York Court of Appeals · 1916
  2. New York Life Insurance v. DunlevySupreme Court of the United States · 1916
  3. Michigan Trust Co. v. FerrySupreme Court of the United States · 1913
  4. Creighton v. KerrSupreme Court of the United States · 1874
  5. Deuscher v. CammeranoNew York Court of Appeals · 1931

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Hendry v. HiltonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1953
  2. Haskell v. HaskellNew York Court of Appeals · 1959
  3. Rapp v. CansdaleNew York Supreme Court · 1960
  4. Fernberg v. FernbergAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1975
  5. Brous v. Van OstrandNew York Supreme Court · 1957

1 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