Legal Opinion

Bailey v. Village of Port Leyden

New York Supreme Court

Decided April 28, 1961PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtHenry A. Hudson, J.

The plaintiffs have moved for an order allowing them to serve a verified, amended notice of claim in duplicate, nunc pro tunc, as of February 16, 1960 and also allowing them leave to amend the complaint in each of the above-entitled actions to duly allege service of the amended notice of claim. The defendant by cross motion has moved pursuant to rule 106 of the Buies of Civil Practice, to dismiss the complaints upon the ground that such complaints do not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. The motion by the defendant to dismiss the plaintiffs’ complaint is based upon two…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Teresta v. City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1952
  2. Boyle v. E. C. Holding Corp.New York Supreme Court · 1948
  3. Gersyl Corp. v. City of New YorkNew York Supreme Court · 1956

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Renwick v. Town of AlleganyNew York Supreme Court · 1962

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

Powered by the Exa API