Legal Opinion

Heaman v. E. N. Rowell Co.

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

Decided October 7, 1931PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Per curiam

Defendant seeks upon this motion to dismiss plaintiff’s complaint, pursuant to rule 112 of the Rules of Civil Practice, upon the ground that it fails to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. The motion is addressed to the entire complaint. If any cause of action is stated the motion must be denied, even if it is apparent that the plaintiff is not entitled to all the relief which he seeks.

The pleading is inartistically drawn. In the first count two causes of action are attempted to be set up, without being separately stated or numbered; one is for the unpaid portion of the…

2Cited by4 opinions

  1. Thibaudeau v. City of Niagara FallsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1933
  2. Heinzelman v. Union News Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1950
  3. Steisel v. GratzerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1947
  4. Stone v. Roberts Numbering Machine Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1956

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

Powered by the Exa API