Legal Opinion

Morrison v. Chapman

New York Supreme Court

Decided April 15, 1909PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Demubbeb to the complaint.

1Opinion of the CourtGiegerich, J.

The defendants demur to the complaint on the ground that it does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. The complaint alleges that, on or prior to the 4th day of June, 1908, the plaintiff employed *196the defendants, a firm of stock-brokers, as his brokers 'and fiduciary agents, to purchase for his account 500 shares of the capital stock of the Chesapeake and Ohio Railway Company, and that, in consideration thereof and of the moneys and securities paid and deposited as thereinafter alleged, the defendants accepted such employment, and agreed to purchase, to make requisite…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Marvin v. . BrooksNew York Court of Appeals · 1883
  2. Black v. VanderbiltAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1902
  3. Haight v. Haight & Freese Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1906
  4. Weed v. SmullNew York Court of Chancery · 1839
  5. Fox v. . FitzpatrickNew York Court of Appeals · 1907

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Morrison v. ChapmanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1913
  2. Tiffany v. HessNew York Supreme Court · 1910

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

Powered by the Exa API