Legal Opinion

Schwartzman v. Weintraub

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided February 3, 1977PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Order, Supreme Court, New York County, entered October 8, 1976, granting plaintiff’s motion for an order permitting him to serve a fourth amended complaint and to add new parties defendant, unanimously affirmed, without costs and without disbursements. Based upon the determination in East Asiatic Co. v Corash (34 AD2d 432), appellants contend that the plaintiff should not have been granted leave to serve a fourth amended complaint because the proposed third cause of action did not state a valid basis for relief. Essentially, the third cause charged that the proposed new defendants conspired…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. East Asiatic Co. v. CorashAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1970
  2. Schwartzman v. WeintraubAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1973

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Ultramar Energy Ltd. v. Chase Manhattan Bank, N.A.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1993
  2. B.S.L. One Owners Corp. v. Key International Manufacturing, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1996

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API