Legal Opinion
Arams v. Arams
New York Supreme Court
Decided November 9, 1943PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtWalter, J.
Plaintiff alleges, in his second cause of action, that he was the owner and entitled to the possession of certain stocks and bonds and that defendant converted them to her own use “ at the City of Zurich, Switzerland, and elsewhere, as well as in the City of New York Defendant moves to dismiss, claiming that no cause of action is stated because the law of Switzerland is not alleged.
As it is difficult to conceive of a single act of conversion taking place in widely separated places, I think the complaint must be. construed as alleging that some of the stocks or bonds mentioned were converted…
2Cases cited43 opinions
- Crowell v. BensonSupreme Court of the United States · 1932
- Loucks v. . Standard Oil Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1918
- American Banana Co. v. United Fruit Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1909
- Int. Com. Comm. v. Louis. & Nash. RRSupreme Court of the United States · 1913
- Reynolds v. StocktonSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
38 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Watts v. Swiss Bank Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1970
- Republic of Haiti v. DuvalierAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1995
- Leo Walton v. Arabian American Oil CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1956
- Gediman v. Anheuser Busch, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1962
- In Re Nigeria Charter Flights Contract LitigationDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 2007
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.