Legal Opinion

Ackerman v. Philip Fleischer, Inc.

New York Supreme Court

Decided November 18, 1959PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

John E. Cone, J,

Defendant moves to serve its amended answer so as to plead two separate defenses: (1) the Statute of Limitations, and (2) Statute of Frauds. The action is to recover alleged earned commissions for services already performed. The papers sans complaint show that plaintiff was an employee of defendant from 1950 to January 10, 1959, when defendant sold its business; that an examination before trial of one of defendant’s officers was had and the case is at issue and on the calendar for November 23. An affidavit by defendant’s attorney merely states that “on a restudy of the case…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Levy v. Delaware, Lackawanna & Western RailroadAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1925
  2. Drescher v. MirkusAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1925
  3. Massi v. Alben Builders, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1946
  4. Massi v. Alben Builders, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1946
  5. Morris v. Coral Cafe, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1953

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Kamen v. StateNew York Court of Claims · 1962
  2. Keahon Bros. v. Palisades Interstate Park CommissionAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1964

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

Powered by the Exa API