Legal Opinion

Mussen v. Ausable Granite Works

New York Supreme Court

Decided March 15, 1892PublishedCited by 23 opinions

Appeal from special term, Essex county. Action by Almon H. Mussen against the Ausable Granite Works and others. A demurrer to the complaint was sustained, and plaintiff appeals.

1Opinion of the CourtHerrick, J.

The plaintiff and appellant brings this action to enforce a lien, given by chapter 315 of the Laws of 1878, against certain funds in the-treasury of the city of Hew York, alleged to be due and belonging to the defendant and respondent the Ausable Granite Works. The city of Hew York is made a party defendant, and is served with a summons and notice of the-object of the action. The venue of the action is laid in Essex county, in the* fourth judicial district. The respondent, the Ausable Granite Works, demurred to the complaint on the grounds that the supreme court in the fourthi judicial…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. The People Ex Rel. the Mayor v. . NicholsNew York Court of Appeals · 1880
  2. Popfinger v. . YutteNew York Court of Appeals · 1886
  3. Alexander v. . BennettNew York Court of Appeals · 1875
  4. People ex rel. Hill v. Board of SupervisorsNew York Supreme Court · 1888

3Cited by23 opinions

  1. Kagen v. KagenNew York Court of Appeals · 1968
  2. Schneider v. AulisiNew York Court of Appeals · 1954
  3. Decker v. CanzoneriAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1939
  4. People ex rel. Newton v. Special Term, Part 1, of Supreme CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1920
  5. State ex rel. Lytle v. Superior CourtWashington Supreme Court · 1909

18 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