Legal Opinion
Rizika v. Kowalsky
New York Supreme Court
Decided December 28, 1954PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBastow, J.
The defendants move pursuant to rule 107 of the Rules of Civil Practice to dismiss the complaint on the ground that the contract upon which the alleged action is founded is unenforcible under the provisions of the Statute of Frauds. The action has been at issue for about three years and normally this motion could not be entertained because of the requirement in rule 107 that it be made within twenty days after the service of the complaint. The parties, however, apparently desiring a decision as to the sufficiency of the pleading, have stipulated that the time to so move be extended for the…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Beatty v. . Guggenheim Exploration Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1919
- Ryan v. . DoxNew York Court of Appeals · 1866
- Woolley v. . StewartNew York Court of Appeals · 1918
- Wheeler v. . ReynoldsNew York Court of Appeals · 1876
- Levy v. . BrushNew York Court of Appeals · 1871
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Yonofsky v. WernickDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1973
- Backus Plywood Corp. v. Commercial Decal, Inc. And Alfred DuhrssenCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1963
- Bontecou v. GoldmanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1984
- Presten v. SailerNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1988
- Flammia v. Mite CorporationDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1975
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.