Legal Opinion

Kaufman v. Farah

New York Court of Appeals

Decided January 24, 1952PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Per curiam

We agree with the Appellate Division that the complaint is legally insufficient (Civ. Prac. Act, § 241; Kalmanash v. Smith, 291 N. Y. 142, 153; Naumer v. Gray, 28 App. Div. 529; Steuer v. Hart, 175 App. Div. 829; see, also, Lanyon’s Detective Agency v. Cochrane, 240 N. Y. 274, 277), with the modification, however, that appellant be given ten days to plead over. The judgment should be modified by providing that plaintiff may have ten days in which to serve an amended complaint on payment of costs in all courts, and, as so modified, affirmed.

If the appellant fails to avail himself of such…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Kalmanash v. SmithNew York Court of Appeals · 1943
  2. Naumer v. GrayAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1898
  3. Lanyon's Detective Agency, Inc. v. CochraneNew York Court of Appeals · 1925
  4. Steuer v. HartAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1916

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Kaufman v. FarahAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1952
  2. Rosenblatt v. WolfAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1962
  3. Kaufman v. FarahAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1952

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

Powered by the Exa API