De Traglia v. Natonal Bank of Hobart
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1DissentWheeler, J.
Although defendants-respondents’ motion to dismiss the complaint was made upon affidavits, apparently under subdivision 4 of rule 107 of the Rules of Civil Practice, the order appealed from grants the motion on the sole ground that the complaint does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action, necessarily under rule 106. Upon a motion under the latter rule to dismiss the complaint for insufficiency appearing on the face thereof, affidavits may not be used and the court is restricted solely to the allegations of the complaint. In determining the sufficiency of this complaint we…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Marie v. . GarrisonNew York Court of Appeals · 1880
- Dyer v. Broadway Central BankNew York Court of Appeals · 1930
- Richard v. American Union BankNew York Court of Appeals · 1930
- Joannes Brothers Co. v. . LambornNew York Court of Appeals · 1923
- Linton v. Perry Knitting Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1945
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.