Legal Opinion
Harbison v. Propper
New York Supreme Court
Decided July 15, 1920PublishedCited by 6 opinions
Motioe" by defendants for judgment upon the pleadings.
1Opinion of the CourtGiegerich, J.
The defendants move for judgment upon the pleadings, consisting of a complaint and an answer. The question is whether the complaint states a cause of action. The complaint alleges that at the city of New York the parties entered into two agreements, dated May 7, 1918, and November 1, 1918, respectively, designated as Exhibits A and B, which are annexed to the complaint and by appropriate alie*590gations made a part thereof. These agreements read as follows:
Exhibit A.
“ Contract between A. B. Harbison, trading as the Philadelphia Hosiery Co., and Edward S. Buckman, trading as the West Side Knitting…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Rosenstock v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1904
- Mosler Safe Co. v. BrennerAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1917
- Rosenstock v. . City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1905
- Ketchum v. AlexanderAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1915
- Prager v. J. S. Scheff & Co.Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1919
3Cited by6 opinions
- In re the Estate of SitkinNew York Surrogate's Court · 1934
- Barber-Greene Co. v. M. F. Dollard, Jr., Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1934
- State v. YoungOregon Supreme Court · 1946
- Baldwin v. Hegeman Farms Corp.New York Supreme Court · 1934
- Marriott v. StateNew York Court of Claims · 1945
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.