Howard v. Tiffany
The Superior Court of New York City
This was an action praying for a preliminary and a perpetual injunction, in respect to the use of demised premises, contrary to the covenants and conditions of a lease. The defendants moved to strike out certain portions of the complaint, as redundant and irrelevant. It is deemed unnecessary to set forth the matter at large. The points are stated in the decision.
1Opinion of the Court
Sandford, J., (withthe concurrence of the chief justice and Paine, J.,) said, the rule applicable to actions for the recovery of money, real property, or the possession of personal property, which were formerly strictly legal, and in which it is sufficient to state the facts constituting the cause of action, substantially, as they were formerly stated in a declaration, could not be always applied to actions where specific relief of a different kind is demanded. Thus, where the object is to obtain an injunction, together with other relief, it will often be indispensable to set forth in the…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Liberty Oil Co. v. Condon National BankSupreme Court of the United States · 1922
- Town of Dunkirk v. Lake Shore & Michigan Southern Railway Co.New York Supreme Court · 1894
- People v. WiseNew York Court of Sessions · 1885