Legal Opinion

Douglas v. Tomkins Realty Corp.

New York Supreme Court

Decided December 28, 1960PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBirdie Amsterdam, J.

This is a motion to strike paragraph “ 11 ” from the complaint pursuant to rule 103 of the Rules of Civil Practice. In view of the nature of the allegations of the entire complaint, and in light of the further disposition hereinafter made, it cannot be said at this posture of the litigation that the matter is irrelevant, unnecessary, impertinent or scandalous or otherwise objectionable. Where evidence of the facts pleaded in the allegations sought to be stricken has any bearing on the subject matter of the litigation, the motion to strike out such allegations as irrelevant, etc., will be…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Dyer v. Broadway Central BankNew York Court of Appeals · 1930
  2. Gerseta Corp. v. Silk Ass'nAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1927
  3. Sanders v. RolnickAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1947
  4. Darlow v. StateNew York Court of Claims · 1955
  5. Goines v. Pennsylvania RailroadNew York Supreme Court · 1955

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Fittipaldi v. LegassieAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1963
  2. Dupont Galleries, Inc. v. International Magne-Tape, Ltd.District Court, S.D. New York · 1969

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

Powered by the Exa API