Legal Opinion
Mossip v. F. H. Clement & Co.
New York Supreme Court
Decided July 12, 1937PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtHarris, J.
The defendant moves to dismiss the complaint herein on the ground that the action, which is one brought under section 130 of the Decedent Estate Law, is barred because the same was not brought within two years after the death of the plaintiff’s intestate.
The facts pertinent to this motion as set forth in the complaint, briefly, are as follows: The defendant employed the plaintiff’s intestate at its plant in Comstock, N. Y., during the year 1930, and the intestate left such employ on the 17th day of December, 1930. He died on or about May 12, 1933, and it is claimed that his death arose from…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Hegerich v. . KeddieNew York Court of Appeals · 1885
- Foster v. Yazoo & Mississippi Valley RailroadMississippi Supreme Court · 1895
- Rice v. Postal Telegraph-Cable Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1916
- Boffe v. . Consolidated Telegraph Electrical Subway Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1919
- Rice v. . Postal Telegraph-Cable CompanyNew York Court of Appeals · 1916
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Hemingway v. ShullDistrict Court, D. South Carolina · 1968
- Neal v. Butler Aviation International, Inc.District Court, E.D. New York · 1976
- Stieve v. H.R.H. ConstructionNew York Supreme Court · 1970