Legal Opinion

Union Savings Bank v. Dudine

New York Supreme Court

Decided August 15, 1963PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJack Stanislaw, J.

Defendant Romano J. Dudine (hereinafter “ Dudine ”) moves to dismiss the complaint pursuant to rules 106 and 107 of the Rules of Civil Practice. Plaintiff is allegedly not a real party in interest, has no legal capacity to sue, does not state a cause of action and is faced with an existing final judgment precluding any rights it now asserts.

This action is the result of plaintiff’s oversight. Dudine had sued his wife Margaret to impress a trust in his favor on real *156property held by her individually. He simultaneously filed a lis pendens in the Suffolk County Clerk’s office on September 13,…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Ward v. . PetrieNew York Court of Appeals · 1898
  2. Spencer v. Standard Chemicals & Metals Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1924
  3. Liberty Maimonides Hospital v. Felberg, New York County Courts1957
  4. City of Albany v. McMorranNew York Supreme Court · 1962
  5. O'Sullivan v. Jarach-Guetta Industrial Overseas Co.New York Supreme Court · 1949

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. King v. PelkofskiNew York Court of Appeals · 1967
  2. United States v. BaranCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1993
  3. United States v. BaranCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1993

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

Powered by the Exa API