Hills v. Peekskill Savings Bank
New York Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment entered upon the decision of Wyoming county special term, dismissing the plaintiff’s complaint, with costs, for the reason that it did not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. The trial was moved before the court without a jury, and thereupon the defendant moved to dismiss the complaint for the reason that upon the facts stated the plaintiff was not entitled to any relief.
Read the full summary
Appeal from a judgment entered upon the decision of Wyoming county special term, dismissing the plaintiff’s complaint, with costs, for the reason that it did not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. The trial was moved before the court without a jury, and thereupon the defendant moved to dismiss the complaint for the reason that upon the facts stated the plaintiff was not entitled to any relief. The action was commenced in November, 1880, by the plaintiff, as a taxpayer, for the purpose of procuring a judgment ordering the cancellation of certain outstanding bonds issued by…
1Opinion of the CourtBarker, J.
—It is to be presumed that the special term dismissed the complaint for the reason that the legal proposition announced by the court of appeals in their opinion, when the case was before that tribunal, when applied to the facts of the case as stated in the complaint, determined *598that the plaintiff was not entitled to any relief. 101 N. Y., 490.
The only relief sought in this action is a decree declaring the substituted bonds referred to in the complaint to be illegal and void. In considering the question presented, the allegations in the complaint should receive a liberal construction, with a…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Downing v. RugarNew York Supreme Court · 1839
- Miller v. GarlockNew York Supreme Court · 1850
- Hills v. . Peekskill Savings BankNew York Court of Appeals · 1886
- People Ex Rel. Dann v. WilliamsNew York Court of Appeals · 1867