Legal Opinion
Port v. Holzinger
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided February 13, 1925No. Appeal No. 1PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Kelly, P. J.:
While the complaint, considered as the statement of an equitable cause of action, may be defective, still if on the pleading as a whole a cause of action at law arising out of the same transaction is set forth, the complaint cannot be dismissed on the ground that it does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. (Wisner v. Consolidated Fruit Jar Co., 25 App. Div. 362; Parker v. Pullman & Co., 36 id. 208; Hughes v. Harlam, 37 id. 528; Lester v. Seilliere, 50 id. 239.) While we may refer to the prayer for relief to ascertain the precise nature and character of the…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Roberts v. . ElyNew York Court of Appeals · 1889
- O'Brien v. . FitzgeraldNew York Court of Appeals · 1894
- Wisner v. Consolidated Fruit Jar Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1898
- Moore v. Bonbright & Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1922
- E. Clemens Horst Co. v. StockerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1909
3Cited by5 opinions
- Moen v. ThompsonNew York Supreme Court · 1946
- Sasanow v. Williamsburg Savings BankAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1939
- Gilbert v. BurnsideNew York Supreme Court · 1958
- Badger v. Scobell Chemical Co.New York Supreme Court · 1927
- Bressler v. Board of Higher EducationAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1945