Adams v. F. W. Woolworth Co.
New York Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtRosenman, J.
These two actions were tried together by the court without a jury pursuant to a stipulation providing for separate verdicts in each case. The first action is for false imprisonment; the second for slander. On the trial the title of the false arrest action and the complaint therein were amended so as to substitute defendant Lowenthal, doing business as Eureka Detective Bureau, in the place of the defendant Eureka Detective Bureau, Inc. Both causes of action arise from the same set of circumstances. Defendant F. W. Woolworth Company operates a chain of five- and ten-cent stores. Defendant…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Baldwin v. AbrahamAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1901
- Sciolaro v. . AschNew York Court of Appeals · 1910
- Baldwin v. . AbrahamNew York Court of Appeals · 1902
- Dupre v. ChildsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1900
- Dupre v. . ChildsNew York Court of Appeals · 1901
3Cited by28 opinions
- Fifth Club, Inc. v. RamirezTexas Supreme Court · 2006
- Ross v. Texas One Partnership, Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)1990
- Giles v. Shell Oil Corp.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1985
- Noble v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.California Court of Appeal · 1973
- Peachtree-Cain Co. v. McBeeSupreme Court of Georgia · 1985
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.