Arrow Communication Laboratories, Inc. v. Pico Products, Inc.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
Order unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly denied defendant’s motion to strike plaintiff’s jury demand. Plaintiff’s first cause of action is for a declaratory judgment interpreting the License Agreement between the parties, determining the rights of the parties, fixing the amounts due under the agreement, determining the amount plaintiff may have overpaid, and granting plaintiff a money judgment for the amount of such overpayment. The other cause of action seeks judgment for monies plaintiff paid into an escrow account as an undertaking after having obtained a…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. WesolowskiNew York Court of Appeals · 1973
- Murphy v. American Home Products Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1988
- Cadwalader Wickersham & Taft v. SpinaleAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1991
- Arrow Communication Laboratories, Inc. v. Pico Products, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994
- John W. Cowper Co. v. Buffalo Hotel Development VentureAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1984
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Banks v. Correctional Services Corp.District Court, E.D. New York · 2007
- Grgurev v. LiculDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2017
- Leveraged Leasing Administration Corp. v. PacifiCorp Capital, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1996
- Leveraged Leasing Administration Corp. v. Pacificorp Capital, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1996
- Ruthman, Mercadante & Hadjis, P. C. v. NardielloAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1999
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.