Brumer v. Brumer
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the CourtVan Kirk, P. J.
At the trial and on the former argument (222 App. Div. 707) the defendant treated this case as an action for conspiracy and, proof of conspiracy having failed, the action must fall (but see Brackett v. Griswold, 112 N. Y. 454); that the evidence did not justify a recovery by the plaintiff and asked only that either the complaint be dismissed or a new trial granted. The complaint was dismissed as to the defendant Wells. Now the wife Lillian is the sole defendant. Now the defendant claims ownership of the whole or part of the fund on deposit. Louis and Lillian Brumer are husband and wife. He…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Brackett v. . GriswoldNew York Court of Appeals · 1889
- Kelly v. . BeersNew York Court of Appeals · 1909
- West v. McCulloughAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1908
- West v. . McCulloughNew York Court of Appeals · 1909
- Elmendorf v. . LockwoodNew York Court of Appeals · 1874
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- In Re Madsen's Est.Utah Supreme Court · 1953
- Lombardi v. First National BankAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1965
- In re the Estate of FliegelmanNew York Surrogate's Court · 1945
- In re the Estate of HickmottNew York Surrogate's Court · 1938
- Herrick v. HamiltonNew York Supreme Court · 1933
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.