Legal Opinion

N. V. Transandine Handelmaatschappij v. Massachusetts Bonding & Insurance

New York Supreme Court

Decided March 23, 1943PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtShientag, J.

Plaintiffs have moved for an order, pursuant to rule 113 of the Rules of Civil Practice, for summary judgment and to strike out each of the defenses pleaded in defendant’s answer, pursuant to rule 109. The defendant, in addi*203tian to contesting these motions, has, pursuant to rule 112, by cross motion asked that the complaint be dismissed upon the ground that it fails to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. Both motions raise the same issues. |

In July, 1940, Harold Anderson, as assignee of one Tietz, sought to sue the plaintiffs in this action for conversion of securities and…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. United States v. PinkSupreme Court of the United States · 1942
  2. United States v. BelmontSupreme Court of the United States · 1937
  3. Clark v. WilliardSupreme Court of the United States · 1934
  4. Clark v. WilliardSupreme Court of the United States · 1935
  5. Vladikavkazsky Railway Co. v. New York Trust Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1934

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. A. C. Israel Commodity Co. v. Banco Do Brasil, S. A.New York Supreme Court · 1966
  2. Fuchs v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1950

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

Powered by the Exa API