Legal Opinion

Hartman v. City of New York

New York Supreme Court

Decided July 7, 1961PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLouis G. Bruhn, J.

This is a motion on behalf of the defendant for an order dismissing the complaint under rule 106 of the Rules of Civil Practice on the ground that it appears on the face of the complaint that it fails to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action.

It appears that the plaintiffs filed a claim against the City of New York under section E4L44.0 of the Administrative Code of that city. Such claim was heard and determined by Commissioners of Appraisal who reported $12,000 indirect damage to real estate and a further sum of $4,000 for business damage.

The report of the Commissioners was…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Matter of ErlangerNew York Court of Appeals · 1923
  2. East River Land Co. v. PrendergastNew York Court of Appeals · 1912
  3. Hudson River Telephone Co. v. City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1914

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Wachs v. WinterDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1983
  2. Elwood v. City of New YorkDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1978

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

Powered by the Exa API