green
Positive treatment
published
Doctrinal family: Lanza v. Wagner ↗
Issue: cross claimNY ↗
Issue: Utica motionNY ↗
Issue: restaurant barNY ↗
Issue: first cross claimNY ↗
5.8 score
Treatment trajectory · 1962 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1962
1994
2026
Cited for
Other citing cases
- Oakwood Cemetery v. Vill./Town of Mount Kisco, 115 A.D.3d 749 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep't 2014).published
- Minovici v. Belkin BV, 109 A.D.3d 520 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep't 2013).published
- Tilcon New York, Inc. v. Town of Poughkeepsie, 87 A.D.3d 1148 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep't 2011).published
- Fitzpatrick v. Rosenthal, 29 A.D.3d 24 (N.Y. App. Div. 4th Dep't 2006).published
- Rockland Cnty. Patrolmen's Benevolent Ass'n v. Prendergast, 25 A.D.3d 615 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep't 2006).published
- Attorney Gen. Opinion No. (Kan. Att'y Gen. 1995).published
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
LANZA ET AL.
v.
WAGNER, MAYOR OF NEW YORK CITY, ET AL.
v.
WAGNER, MAYOR OF NEW YORK CITY, ET AL.
452.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Nov 13, 1962.
Published opinion
Per Curiam.
Cited by 67 opinions | Published
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW YORK.
Vito F. Lanza, pro se, and Samuel Shapiro for appellants.
Louis J. Lefkowitz, Attorney General of New York, Irving Galt, Assistant Solicitor General, Sheldon Raab, Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Leo A. Larkin and Seymour B. Quel for appellees.
PER CURIAM.
The motions to dismiss are granted and the appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial federal question.