Legal Opinion

Van Schaick v. Cronin

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided December 9, 1932PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMerrell, J.

The first separate and complete defense which the plaintiff moved to strike out was that the present action was not commenced against the defendant Eno within three years from the time when the cause of action attempted to be alleged against said defendant accrued to the Equitable Casualty and Surety Company, nor within three years from the time when the said company had actual knowledge of all the facts upon which its alleged right or cause of action against said defendant depended. In short, that plaintiff’s cause of action is barred by the three-year Statute of Limitations under…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Pollitz v. . Wabash R.R. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1912
  2. Gilbert v. . AckermanNew York Court of Appeals · 1899
  3. Goldberg v. BerryAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1930
  4. Blackwell v. Columbia Trust Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1922

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Michelsen v. PenneyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1943
  2. Van Schaick v. AronNew York Supreme Court · 1938
  3. Loughman v. PitzDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1941
  4. Van Schaick v. CroninAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1932
  5. Broderick v. HorvattNew York Supreme Court · 1933

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

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

Powered by the Exa API