Beslity v. Manhattan Honda
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York
1Opinion of the Court
*849OPINION OF THE COURT
2Per curiam
Judgment dated May 6,1982 is reversed, with $30 costs; judgment is awarded in favor of the plaintiff in the sum of $50.
Plaintiff, an attorney, brought this small claims action to recover $800 damages and attorney’s fees upon the ground that the defendant Manhattan Honda had engaged in false advertising in violation of subdivision 3 of section 350-d of the General Business Law (L 1980, ch 345). The advertisement giving rise to this claim appeared in the New York Times, on Sunday, December 27, 1981. It announced in bold print, “$1,000. off* 1982 accord hatchback” and further…
3Cases cited6 opinions
- Guggenheimer v. GinzburgNew York Court of Appeals · 1977
- New York Post Corp. v. LeibowitzNew York Court of Appeals · 1957
- Geismar v. Abraham & StrausSuffolk County District Court · 1981
- People v. Volkswagen of America, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1975
- Floersheim v. WeinburgerDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1972
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
4Cited by17 opinions
- Panag v. Farmers Ins. Co. of WashingtonWashington Supreme Court · 2009
- Citaramanis v. HallowellCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1992
- Zanakis-Pico v. Cutter Dodge, Inc.Hawaii Supreme Court · 2002
- Construction Technology v. Lockformer Co., Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1989
- McDonald v. North Shore Yacht Sales, Inc.New York Supreme Court · 1987
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.