Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
5 New York opinions name it 3 courts 1909–2026 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by New York courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Leon v. Martinezgreen1 sentence2026On a motion to dismiss pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(7), the court must accept the facts as alleged in the complaint as true, accord the plaintiff the benefit of every possible favorable inference, and determine only whether the facts as alleged fit within any cognizable legal theory (see Leon v Martinez, 84 NY2d 83, 87-88 [1994]). | 1 | 1 |
National Bank of California v. Minergreen2 sentences1966Bank v. Noble, supra, p. 56 and, see, Schank v. Schuchmun, supra, p. 358, quoted above.) “ The fact that the agent credits the principal with the amount received does not release the agent from his obligation to make restitution so long as he continues to hold the money on behalf of the principal (Rest., Restitution, sec. 143 (b); Rest., Agency, sec. 339 (f); see National Bank of Calif. v. Miner, 167 Cal. 532 [ 140 Pac. 27 ]; 2 C. 1966Bank v. Noble, supra, p. 56 and, see, Schank v. Schuchmun, supra, p. 358, quoted above.) “ The fact that the agent credits the principal with the amount received does not release the agent from his obligation to make restitution so long as he continues to hold the money on behalf of the principal (Rest., Restitution, sec. 143 (b); Rest., Agency, sec. 339 (f); see National Bank of Calif. v. Miner, 167 Cal. 532 [ 140 Pac. 27 ]; 2 C. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in New York. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
F. W. Woolworth Co. v. Southbridge Towers, Inc.
green
1 sentence1986(Woolworth Co. v Southbridge Towers, 101 AD2d 434 .) Third-party defendant asserts that Columbia, as a successive tort-feasor, cannot claim contribution or indemnification from him as the original tort-feasor, where the plaintiff asserts a claim for injuries allegedly caused only by the successive tort-feasor. | 1 | 1986–1986 |
Vescia v. Melahn
neutral
1 sentence1978Courts, other than the Court of Claims, indeed lack jurisdiction to adjudicate such claims (State of New York v Lang, 84 Misc 2d 106 , affd 52 AD2d 921 ; Diamond v Martin-Deichsel Leather Co., 67 Misc 2d 341 ; People v C. & W. | 1 | 1978–1978 |
Diamond v. Martin-Deichsel Leather Co.
neutral
1 sentence1978Courts, other than the Court of Claims, indeed lack jurisdiction to adjudicate such claims (State of New York v Lang, 84 Misc 2d 106 , affd 52 AD2d 921 ; Diamond v Martin-Deichsel Leather Co., 67 Misc 2d 341 ; People v C. & W. | 1 | 1978–1978 |
State v. Lang
neutral
1 sentence1978Courts, other than the Court of Claims, indeed lack jurisdiction to adjudicate such claims (State of New York v Lang, 84 Misc 2d 106 , affd 52 AD2d 921 ; Diamond v Martin-Deichsel Leather Co., 67 Misc 2d 341 ; People v C. & W. | 1 | 1978–1978 |
First National Bank of Portland v. Noble
green
1 sentence1966Bank v. Noble, supra, p. 56 and, see, Schank v. Schuchmun, supra, p. 358, quoted above.) “ The fact that the agent credits the principal with the amount received does not release the agent from his obligation to make restitution so long as he continues to hold the money on behalf of the principal (Rest., Restitution, sec. 143 (b); Rest., Agency, sec. 339 (f); see National Bank of Calif. v. Miner, 167 Cal. 532 [ 140 Pac. 27 ]; 2 C. | 1 | 1966–1966 |
In re the Application of La Grave
neutral
1 sentence1909Burr, J.: A motion for an examination of the defendant in an action before issue joined will be denied when the" moving papers show that the plaintiff already has knowledge of sufficient facts upon which the intended action is based to enable him to frame a complaint, (Matter of La Grave, 132 App. Div. 108 ; Diefendorf v. Fenn, 125 id. 651.) The affidavit upon which the order for examination was granted shows that the plaintiff asserts a claim against the defendants for $15,000 which he advanced to the Telluride Beduction Company, for which, on the 1st day of February, 1901, he accepted the pr | 1 | 1909–1909 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.