Legal Opinion

Max Miskowitz & Starobin & Miskowitz, Inc. v. Starobin

New York Supreme Court

Decided May 21, 1943PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBernstein, J.

This motion by the defendant for judgment on the pleadings presents but three questions: (1) Is the provision of paragraph 9 of the agreement, annexed to the complaint as Exhibit A, valid and enforcible? (2) Is the restrictive covenant of paragraph 4 of said agreement still effective and binding upon the individual plaintiff? (3) Is a declaratory judgment the proper form of remedy in the action?

The complaint discloses that, on July 1, 1938, the plaintiff Max Miskowitz and the defendant’s husband, Mort Starobin, being then the sole stockholders of Starobin & Miskowitz, Inc., a corporation…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. James v. Alderton Dock Yards, Ltd.New York Court of Appeals · 1931
  2. Varney v. . DitmarsNew York Court of Appeals · 1916
  3. United Press v. . New York Press Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1900
  4. Oscar Schlegel Manufacturing Co. v. Peter Cooper's Glue FactoryNew York Court of Appeals · 1921
  5. Mentz v. . NewwitterNew York Court of Appeals · 1890

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Pettaway v. Commercial Automotive Service, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 1957
  2. Cutting Room Appliances Corp. v. FinkelsteinAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1969
  3. Cowan v. De WittNew York Supreme Court · 1954
  4. Miskowitz v. StarobinAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1944
  5. Pettaway v. Commercial Automotive Service, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 1957

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

Powered by the Exa API