Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part
Toomey v. Farley
New York Court of Appeals
Decided October 19, 1956Published
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partDte, J.
We concur with what has been said in the majority opinion respecting the sufficiency of the complaint to allege a cause of action (Mencher v. Chesley, 297 N. Y. 94); that on this record the defendant James J. Farley was not improperly deprived of his right to participate in the selection of the jury, since we deem his rights were adequately protected by counsel ostensibly clothed with authority to represent him; we agree that the judgment rendered against the defendant James Gf. Donovan should be reversed and the complaint as to him dismissed (Civ. Prac. Act, § 51, subd. 3; Gregoire v. G. P.…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Malinski v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Mencher v. ChesleyNew York Court of Appeals · 1947
- Gregoire v. G. P. Putnam's SonsNew York Court of Appeals · 1948
- Sydney v. MacFadden Newspaper Publishing Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1926
- Bingham v. . GaynorNew York Court of Appeals · 1911
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.