Legal Opinion

Termini v. John Arthur Exhibitions, Inc.

New York Supreme Court

Decided November 22, 1957PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSidney A. Fine, J.

This application to vacate a judgment entered upon the granting of a motion made pursuant to rule 113 of the Rules of Civil Practice is predicated on “ plaintiff’s fraud in procuring the judgment, newly discovered evidence, error in fact, and in the interests of inherent justice ’ ’.

The claim of fraud, newly discovered evidence and error in fact is based upon the failure of plaintiff’s attorney to disclose to the court that, while representing a client other than the present plaintiff, he wrote a letter in which he claimed that the sublicense upon which this suit is based had become…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Dunn v. . Uvalde Asphalt Paving Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1903
  2. Seibert v. . DunnNew York Court of Appeals · 1915
  3. Keon v. Saxton & Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1931
  4. Blog v. Burden & Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1933

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Spodek v. Park Property Development AssociatesAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1999
  2. James Talcott, Inc. v. Winco Sales Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1964

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

Powered by the Exa API