Legal Opinion
Busch v. Interborough Rapid Transit Co.
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York
Decided May 2, 1905PublishedCited by 2 opinions
Appeal from Municipal Court, Borough of Manhattan, Seventh District. Action by Emanuel A. Busch against the Interborough Rapid Transit Company. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals. Reversed.
1Opinion of the CourtScott, P. J.
The complaint states a cause of action for assault and battery and false imprisonment, and for nothing else. Of such an action the Municipal Court has not jurisdiction. Fister v. Met. St. Ry. Co., 30 Misc. Rep. 430, 62 N. Y. Supp. 467. As was said in the case cited:
“The character of the action must be determined by the substantial allegations of the-complaint, and, when the averments are such as to indicate that the whole scope and purpose of the action is to recover for alleged wrongs, the plaintiff cannot recover for a breach of contract.”
The case made by the complaint entirely…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Palmeri v. Manhattan Railway Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1892
- Hart v. Metropolitan Street Railway Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1901
- Hines v. Dry Dock, East Broadway & Battery RailroadAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1902
- Hart v. Metropolitan Street Railway Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1901
- People Ex Rel. Fox v. . HaydenNew York Court of Appeals · 1892
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Arkin v. Interborough Rapid Transit Co.Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1905
- Arkin v. Interborough Rapid Transit Co.Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1905