Legal Opinion
Veverka v. Spinella
New York Supreme Court
Decided June 6, 1969PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJohn H. Pennock, J.
The plaintiff makes this motion for an order directing that actions 1, 2 and 3 be consolidated and that actions 1 and 2 be removed from Greene County to Albany County, and a day certain be granted.
This motion is granted.
The defendant in actions 2 and 3 moves for summary judgment dismissing plaintiff’s complaint pursuant to CPLR 3212. This motion is denied. The ease of Hadley v. Baxendale (9 Ex. 341; 156 Eng. Rep. 145) traditionally has been the fundamental test for damages where there is a breach of contract: more specifically, in this case, breach of certain warranties. In this landmark…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Wakeman v. Wheeler & Wilson Manufacturing Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1886
- Ehrgott v. . Mayor, Etc., of City of N.Y.New York Court of Appeals · 1884
- Steitz v. GiffordNew York Court of Appeals · 1939
- Booth v. . Spuyten Duyvil Rolling Mill Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1875
- Garrison v. Sun Printing & Publishing Ass'nNew York Court of Appeals · 1912
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Carruthers v. FlaumDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2005
- Catskill Development, L.L.C. v. Park Place Entertainment Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 2001
- In Re Emergency Beacon Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 1985
- 81 Franklin Co. v. GinacciniCivil Court of the City of New York · 1990
- Texport Oil Co. v. M/V AMOLYNTOSDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1993