Legal Opinion

Meinhardt v. Britting

New York Supreme Court

Decided January 7, 1958PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtD. Ormonde Ritchie, J.

The defendants John A. Britting and Edna Britting make a motion pursuant to section 241 of the Civil Practice Act for an order striking the complaint as violative of the direction therein that every pleading shall contain a plain and concise statement of the material facts without unnecessary repetition and evidentiary matter; or, in the alternative, pursuant to subdivision 4 of rule 106 of the Rules of Civil Practice, for an order dismissing the complaint on the ground that it does not state facts sufficient to constitute the causes of action set forth therein; pursuant to subdivision 1 of…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Kleinfeld v. Roburn Agencies, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1946
  2. Fox v. SmithAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1908
  3. Blanshard v. City of New YorkNew York Supreme Court · 1931
  4. Ledwith v. IgnatiusNew York Supreme Court · 1942
  5. Chelnik v. WagnerNew York Supreme Court · 1955

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Paliotto v. Town of IslipNew York Supreme Court · 1962
  2. Wein v. City of New YorkNew York Supreme Court · 1975
  3. Wolfson v. MandellAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1963

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API