Hastings v. Byllesby Co. (Granbery)
New York Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
Lehman, Ch. J.
Upon a companion appeal [Hastings v. Byllesby (Haystone) 293 N. Y. 404] decided herewith, we have held that the sixteenth cause of action against Hay-stone Securities Co., contained in the complaint in the above-entitled action, is barred by the Statute of Limitations of the State of New York. Upon this appeal the question presented is whether the eighteenth cause of action against the defendants-appellants, contained in the same complaint, is also barred. A motion made by the defendants-appellants to dismiss that cause of action against them on the ground that it was barred by…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Wilson v. IsemingerSupreme Court of the United States · 1902
- Gilbert v. . AckermanNew York Court of Appeals · 1899
- Halsted v. . SilbersteinNew York Court of Appeals · 1909
- People v. CohenNew York Court of Appeals · 1927
- Hastings v. Byllesby Co. (Haystone)New York Court of Appeals · 1944
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by28 opinions
- Shielcrawt v. MoffettNew York Court of Appeals · 1945
- Pennsylvania Greyhound Lines, Inc. v. RosenthalSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1954
- Oil & Gas Ventures-First 1958 Fund, Ltd. v. KungDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1966
- Pereira v. Centel Corp. (In Re Argo Communications Corp.)United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · 1991
- Hoff Research & Development Laboratories, Inc. v. Philippine National Bank and Philippine National Bank, New York AgencyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1970
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.