Legal Opinion

Phinney v. Andrus

City of New York Municipal Court

Decided September 15, 1919PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Motion for judgment on the pleadings.

1Opinion of the CourtFinelite, J.

These are cross-motions. The defendant demurs to the amended complaint upon the ground that it does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action; that there is a defect of parties plaintiff in that plaintiff’s assignor is a necessary party to the action and has not been made a party herein, and that plaintiff has not legal capacity to sue in that the separation agreement annexed to the complaint, and made part thereof, shows upon its face that the alleged contract between the defendant and his wife (plaintiff’s assignor) was personal to her, and the: right to receive payment of…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Winter v. . WinterNew York Court of Appeals · 1908
  2. In re ThrallAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1896
  3. Jacobson v. JacobsonCity of New York Municipal Court · 1914
  4. Spence v. WoodsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1909

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Elkin v. EhrensCivil Court of the City of New York · 1964
  2. In re the Estate of HudesNew York Surrogate's Court · 1926

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

Powered by the Exa API