Kaufman v. Investors Syndicate
New York Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtWasservogel, J.
The allegation in the first defense that the agreement here involved “ is and always has been in all respects legal, valid and enforceable; that under the laws of the State of Minnesota which govern, plaintiff has no cause of action,” is but a legal conclusion. No facts from which such conclusion can be drawn are pleaded. The second defense is insufficient as a matter of law inasmuch as advice claimed to have been given to defendant by the Superintendent of Banks with respect to the legality of defendant’s transactions is not a defense to this action.
Motion to strike out both defenses…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Morgenstern v. CohonNew York Court of Appeals · 1957
- McGowan v. McGowanNew York Supreme Court · 1950
- Monclova v. ArnettNew York Supreme Court · 1957
- Morgenstern v. CohonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1956