Legal Opinion

Schuster v. City of New York

New York Supreme Court

Decided March 6, 1953PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWalsh, J.

The question presented to this court is whether or not plaintiff’s complaint states any cause of action cognizable in law which would warrant a recovery of damages against the City of New York. The defendant municipality contends that it does not and asks, therefore, that it be dismissed.

The complaint combines in one pleading four asserted causes of action. On familiar principles applicable to a motion such as this which seeks to deny a litigant the right to proceed to trial all of the facts which plaintiff asserts are to be assumed to be true. If he has presented even a single cause of…

2Cases cited35 opinions

  1. Palsgraf v. Long Island R.R. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1928
  2. H. R. Moch Co. v. Rensselaer Water Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1928
  3. Bernardine v. City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1945
  4. City of Rochester v. . CampbellNew York Court of Appeals · 1890
  5. Steitz v. City of BeaconNew York Court of Appeals · 1945

30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Isereau v. StoneNew York Supreme Court · 1955
  2. Dour v. Village of Port JeffersonNew York Supreme Court · 1976
  3. Janosko v. KrossNew York Supreme Court · 1960
  4. Farley v. StoneNew York Supreme Court · 1955
  5. King v. City of New YorkNew York Supreme Court · 1956

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API