Legal Opinion

Flanagan v. Conners

New York Supreme Court

Decided May 17, 1924PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLevy, J.

This is a motion by defendant Conners, under rule 106 of the Rules of Civil Practice, to dismiss the complaint on the ground that it fails to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. Plaintiff, an attorney, entered into an agreement with the said defendant whereby the latter agreed to pay plaintiff $1,500 for his services in appearing before the board of aldermen and the board of estimate and apportionment for the purpose of pressing such defendant’s claim for the return to him of $6,500 which was forfeited to the city on his failure to perform a contract. Plaintiff concededly…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Trist v. ChildSupreme Court of the United States · 1875
  2. Williams v. . IngersollNew York Court of Appeals · 1882
  3. Matter of HeinsheimerNew York Court of Appeals · 1915
  4. Fairbanks v. . SargentNew York Court of Appeals · 1889
  5. Holmes v. BellAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1910

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. In re AlbrechtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1929
  2. United States v. HudsonDistrict Court, D. Montana · 1941
  3. Cunningham v. Sizer Steel Corp.District Court, W.D. New York · 1924
  4. Irish Free State v. Guaranty Safe Deposit Co.New York Supreme Court · 1933

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

Powered by the Exa API