Glover v. Holbrook, Cabot & Rollins Corp.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Appeal by the defendant, Holbrook, Cabot & Rollins Corporation, from an order of the Supreme Court, made at the New York Special Term and entered in the office of the clerk of the county of New York on the 9th day of March, 1917, denying defendant’s motion to compel plaintiff separately to state and number her causes of action, or, in the alternative, to strike out certain allegations of the complaint.
1Opinion of the Court
Page, J.:
It is conceded by the plaintiff’s counsel, and was stated by the learned justice at Special Term, that each of the causes of action alleged in the complaint would warrant a *329recovery for unlawfully and wrongfully maintaining a nuisance or for negligence. It is contended that a party cannot be compelled to state the theory on which he will ask a recovery until he has produced his proof. As an authority for this proposition the court cites Schoenfeld v. Mott Avenue Realty Company (168 App. Div. 91). In that case, however, the complaint alleged two distinct causes of action, one for a…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Stabilimento Metallurgico Ligure v. JosephAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1919
- Schoenfeld v. Mott Avenue Realty Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1915
3Cited by8 opinions
- Blessington v. McCrory Stores Corp.New York Supreme Court · 1950
- Smith v. EarleAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1922
- Heaphy v. EidlitzAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1921
- Glass v. StateNew York Court of Claims · 1956
- McDonnell v. GerkenAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1921
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.