Legal Opinion

Credit Alliance Corp. v. Arthur Andersen & Co.

New York Court of Appeals

Decided November 12, 1985PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Motion to amend remittitur granted. Return of remittitur requested and, when returned, it will be amended by adding thereto the following: "The dismissal of the cause of action based upon fraud is without prejudice to an application by plaintiffs to Supreme Court for leave to serve an amended complaint with regard to that cause of action. Such application should include a copy of the proposed amended complaint accompanied by a disclosure of the evidentiary facts which would support the claims set forth in the proposed amended complaint and would justify the granting of such leave (see, CPLR…

2Cited by14 opinions

  1. Department of Economic Development v. Arthur Andersen & Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1996
  2. Alpert v. Shea Gould Climenko & CaseyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990
  3. Boykin v. Arthur Andersen & Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1994
  4. Ambassador Factors v. Kandel & Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1995
  5. Fidelity & Deposit Co. v. Arthur Andersen & Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1987

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

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

Powered by the Exa API