Legal Opinion
Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Enco Associates
New York Supreme Court
Decided June 4, 1975PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtMorrie Slifkin, J.
In an action against architects to recover damages for alleged negligence, breach of contract, and breach of implied warranty, defendant moves to dismiss the complaint on the grounds that the action is barred by the Statute of Limitations (CPLR 3211, subd [a], par 5) and that the pleading fails to state a cause of action (CPLR 3211, subd [a], par 7).
On March 24, 1975, this court denied the motion with leave to renew upon proper papers. Thereafter, the matter was renewed on May 16, 1975 and referred to this court.
An examination of the complaint reveals that plaintiff is a domestic corporation…
2Cases cited30 opinions
- Babcock v. JacksonNew York Court of Appeals · 1963
- Auten v. AutenNew York Court of Appeals · 1954
- Neumeier v. KuehnerNew York Court of Appeals · 1972
- Borgia v. City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1962
- Brick v. Cohn-Hall-Marx Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1937
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- City of Mounds View v. WalijarviSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1978
- Southern International Sales Co. v. Potter & Brumfield Division of AMF Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1976
- LaBeach v. Beatrice Foods Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1978
- North American Bank, Ltd. v. Schulman, New York County Courts1984
- Queensbury Union Free School District v. Jim Walter Corp.New York Supreme Court · 1977
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.