Woolsey v. Sunderland
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Appeal by the defendant, William H. Sunderland, from an interlocutory judgment of the Supreme Court in favor of the plaintiff, entered in the office of the clerk of the county of Ulster on the 20th day of March, 1899, upon the decision of the court, rendered after a trial at the Ulster Special Term, overruling the defendant’s demurrer to paragraph numbered II and paragraph numbered III of the complaint, with notice of an intention to bring up for review on such appeal an…
Read the full summary
Appeal by the defendant, William H. Sunderland, from an interlocutory judgment of the Supreme Court in favor of the plaintiff, entered in the office of the clerk of the county of Ulster on the 20th day of March, 1899, upon the decision of the court, rendered after a trial at the Ulster Special Term, overruling the defendant’s demurrer to paragraph numbered II and paragraph numbered III of the complaint, with notice of an intention to bring up for review on such appeal an order entered in said clerk’s office on the 20th day of March, 1899, overruling said demurrer.
1Opinion of the Court
Parker, P. J. :
In the first cause of action to which the defendant demurs, the act upon which the plaintiff relies is substantially stated as follows: That the defendant “ by trick and device, or deception or otherwise, and while said Fowler was helplessly intoxicated and confined to his bed ” at the defendant’s hotel, etc., “ falsely and fraudulently obtained from said Fowler $1,200.” It is claimed by tlie defe'hd.ant that such averments do not state facts sufficient to sustain an *87action for fraud. The respondent’s counsel, in substance, replies that this is not a cause of action based- upon…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Knapp v. . the City of BrooklynNew York Court of Appeals · 1884
3Cited by4 opinions
- In re the Estate of MullinNew York Surrogate's Court · 1932
- Arlt v. WhitlockAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1901
- Friedman Marble & Slate Works, Inc. v. WhitcombAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1919
- King v. Murphy, New York County Courts1914