Legal Opinion
Garliner v. Glicken
New York Supreme Court
Decided February 24, 1960PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtG. Robert Witmer, J.
Defendants move to require plaintiffs to separately state and number the causes of action which defendants contend are alleged in the first cause of action of plaintiffs’ complaint herein. In said pleading plaintiffs recite that they formerly owned a parcel of land which they sold to defendants’ predecessor in 1956 and took back a purchase-money mortgage and also a chattel mortgage upon certain chattels which went with the sale; that shortly thereafter said predecessor transferred said realty and personalty to defendants who have remained in possession and have operated the business thereon.…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Van Pelt v. . McGrawNew York Court of Appeals · 1850
- Payne v. New York, Susquehanna & Western RailroadNew York Court of Appeals · 1911
- Syracuse Savings Bank v. Onondaga Silk Co.New York Supreme Court · 1939
- Syracuse Savings Bank v. Onondaga Silk Co.New York Supreme Court · 1940
- President & Directors of the Manhattan Co. v. Mosler Safe Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1935
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Genesco Inc. v. Monumental Life Insurance Co.District Court, D. South Carolina · 1983
- Albins v. SUPERIOR CT. IN & FOR YAVAPAI CTY.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 1968
- Greenberg v. Nusbaum's Department Store, Inc.New York Supreme Court · 1962