Legal Opinion

Metropolitan Commercial Corp. v. Scheffler

New York Supreme Court

Decided April 8, 1932PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtNoonan, J.

The complaint sets up a cause of action to recover upon a promissory note and then proceeds to allege facts which would constitute fraud by the defendant against the plaintiff in contracting the liability. Inspection of the complaint shows plainly that the cause of action alleged is one in contract upon the note and not one in tort for damages for fraud or deceit.

After a trial the court granted judgment in favor of the plaintiff and against the defendant for the amount demanded in the complaint, with costs; subsequently, without notice to the defendant and after the defendant’s time to appeal…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Elwood v. . GardnerNew York Court of Appeals · 1871

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. In re SchefflerDistrict Court, W.D. New York · 1932
  2. Metropolitan Commercial Corp. v. SchefflerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1934
  3. Lemelstretch v. GerstnerNew York Supreme Court · 1957
  4. Metropolitan Commercial Corp. v. SchefflerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1935

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

Powered by the Exa API