Legal Opinion
Hoffman v. Alpern
City of New York Municipal Court
Decided June 29, 1948PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtRivers, J.
Motions numbers 21 and 27 of June 14, 1948, have been consolidated.
The motion by defendants Knapp, Inc., and Arthur Reick and Alexander Bennett, doing business as Arthur Reick & Company, for summary judgment under rule 113 of the Rules of Civil Practice and dismissing the complaint against those *696defendants is granted with leave to plaintiff to serve an amended complaint within ten days after service upon his attorney of a copy of this order with notice of entry.
The motion of defendant, Seymour Knapp, Inc., for judgment on the counterclaim is denied, as the facts concerning its own title are…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- People v. . MillerNew York Court of Appeals · 1902
- Elsfelder v. CournandAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1945
- Phelps v. . McQuadeNew York Court of Appeals · 1917
- Bassett v. . SpoffordNew York Court of Appeals · 1871
- Phelps v. McQuadeAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1913
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Ross v. LeuciCity of New York Municipal Court · 1949
- Buy This, Inc. v. MCI WorldCom CommunicationsDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2002