Davidson v. Sterngass
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
In our opinion the pleadings and affidavits submitted were insufficient to establish that the trial of this action will require the examination of a long account, within the meaning of the statute. (Cf. Cassidy v. McFarland,, 139 N. Y. 201; Hemmerich v. City of Geneva, 251 App. Div. 105; Dauch v. Great Neck Holdring Corp., 213 App. Div. 881; Mugler v. Castleton Hotel & Realty Co., 168 App. Div. 492.) A compulsory reference will not be ordered upon a showing of a mere possibility that a long account will be involved and that the several items thereof will become centers of independent…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Cassidy v. . McFarlandNew York Court of Appeals · 1893
- Drivas v. LekasAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1942
- Brooklyn Public Library v. City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1925
- Mugler v. Castleton Hotel & Realty Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1915
- Hemmerich v. City of GenevaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1937
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Bagdy v. Progresso Foods Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1982
- Giardino Corp. v. GoldblattAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1952
- Heos v. LadnerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1952
- Huggan v. Brookdale HospitalAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 2006
- In re the Accounting of SchwanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1953
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.