Legal Opinion

Fite v. Miller

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

Decided March 19, 1952PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Per curiam

The plaintiff’s action is to recover from the defendant money alleged to have been expended by her for necessaries in support of the defendant’s child. The defendant moved at Special Term to dismiss the complaint under rules 106 and 107 of the Buies of Civil Practice. The order appealed, from denied the motion. It does not appear on what grounds or under which rule the denial of the motion was based. We think the denial of the motion under rule 106 to dismiss on the ground that the complaint did not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action was error. The complaint was so *13drawn…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. De Brauwere v. . De BrauwereNew York Court of Appeals · 1911
  2. Rosseau v. . RoussNew York Court of Appeals · 1904
  3. Laumeier v. . LaumeierNew York Court of Appeals · 1924
  4. Burger v. NeumannNew York Supreme Court · 1947

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Palmer v. BrownNew York Family Court · 1961

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

Powered by the Exa API