Gotthelf v. Shapiro
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Appeal by the defendants, Max J, Shapiro and another, from an . interlocutory judgment of the Supreme Court in favor of the plaintiffs, entered in the office of the. cleric of the county of Kings on the 30th day of April, 1909, upon the decision of the court rendered after a trial at the Kings County Special Term overruling the defendants’ demurrer to the complaint on the ground that it does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action; that there are other…
Read the full summary
Appeal by the defendants, Max J, Shapiro and another, from an . interlocutory judgment of the Supreme Court in favor of the plaintiffs, entered in the office of the. cleric of the county of Kings on the 30th day of April, 1909, upon the decision of the court rendered after a trial at the Kings County Special Term overruling the defendants’ demurrer to the complaint on the ground that it does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action; that there are other actions pending between the same parties for the same causes of action, and that causes of action have been improperly…
1Opinion of the Court
Jenks, J.:
This appeal is from an interlocutory judgment overruling' a demurrer to the complaint. The defendants are two brothers named Hyman and Max J. Shapiro. The grievance of the plaintiffs is that in their sale of their lands to-Hyman the defendants contrived and worked a fraud upon them. They aver that they were ignorant throughout the transaction of-the given name of Hyman and of the existence of Mak, and that the defendants took advantage of this ignorance so that, although their dealings were with Hyman exclusively, the contract for purchase was executed in the name of Max, the deed…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Welles v. . YatesNew York Court of Appeals · 1871
- David v. . Williamsburgh City Fire Ins. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1880
- In re SnookNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1859
- England v. New York Publishing Co.New York Court of Common Pleas · 1878
- Collins v. CornwellIndiana Supreme Court · 1892
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Ludwinska v. John Hancock Mutual Life InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1935
- Maslin v. Columbian Nat. Life Ins. Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1932
- In re the Estate of ErlangerNew York Surrogate's Court · 1932
- Flaherty v. Broadway Associate Ltd. PartnershipAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1991
- Sorivi v. BaldiDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1946
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.