Whitner v. Perhacs
New York Supreme Court
Action by Mary A. E. Whitner against Emil M. Perhacs. The complaint was as follows: “Plaintiff complains and says that she purchased from defendant sixty-six and one-third shares of the capital stock of the New England Biscuit Bakery of New York of the par value of $6,666.66, being one-third of the capital stock of said company.
Read the full summary
Action by Mary A. E. Whitner against Emil M. Perhacs. The complaint was as follows: “Plaintiff complains and says that she purchased from defendant sixty-six and one-third shares of the capital stock of the New England Biscuit Bakery of New York of the par value of $6,666.66, being one-third of the capital stock of said company. That at that time, and for a long time previous thereto, defendant was president of said biscuit company, which was a corporation created under the laws of the state of New York, and doing business in the city of New York. That plaintiff at said time was personally…
1Opinion of the CourtIngraham, J.
There is but one cause of action set up in the complaint; that is, an action for damages caused by the fraudulent misrepresentations made by defendant. The fact that there are two items of damage, one the amount paid by plaintiff for the stock, and one the value of the services rendered to the corporation, does not make two causes of action. The motion to separately state the causes of action denied. Nor should the plaintiff be required to make the complaint more definite and certain as to the items of the damage alleged to have been sustained by plaintiff. If information is sought upon that…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Tilton v. . BeecherNew York Court of Appeals · 1874
- Jackman v. LordNew York Supreme Court · 1890
- Rouget v. HaightNew York Supreme Court · 1890
- Blake v. BarnesNew York Supreme Court · 1890
- Mckenzie v. FoxNew York Supreme Court · 1890
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.