Legal Opinion
Schillinger & Albert, Inc. v. Myral Hats, Inc.
Civil Court of the City of New York
Decided November 22, 1967PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtWilliam T. O ’Connell, J.
Defendants move to dismiss under
CPLR 3211 on the ground that this action is not authorized by plaintiff. The complaint seeks to recover specific moneys had and received by one defendant for the benefit of plaintiff and then wrongfully deposited in the account of the other defendant. On its face such a cause of action is within the jurisdiction of this court (La Forge v. Cornell, 127 N. Y. S. 453; John Berg, Inc. v. Associated Spinners, 201 Misc. 627; cf. Kane v. Auto Laks Mfg. Co., 172 N. Y. S. 275).
However, it appears that plaintiff is a closed corporation having two equal stockholders who…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Sterling Industries, Inc. v. Ball Bearing Pen Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1949
- Security Trust Co. v. PritchardAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1922
- John Berg Inc. v. Associated Spinners Inc.City of New York Municipal Court · 1951
- Kardwheel Corp. v. KarperNew York Supreme Court · 1956
- In re the Arbitration between Paloma Frocks, Inc., & Shamokin Sportswear Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1956
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Crane, A.G. v. 206 West 41st Street Hotel Associates, L.P.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011
- Tobet v. New York City Transit AuthorityCivil Court of the City of New York · 1987