plaintiff relies doctrine (New York) · Go Syfert
← New York issues

plaintiff relies doctrine in New York

5 New York opinions name it 3 courts 1915–2014 0 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.

Followed or applied (0)

CaseFollowedCited
No positive-treatment citations attached to this issue in New York.

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in New York. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (8)

CaseCitedYears
Butti v. Rollins green
nyappdiv · 1987
2 sentences

2014Although res ipsa loquitur may be utilized where more than one defendant may have been in control (see Kerber v Sarles, 151 AD2d 1031 [1989]; Butti v Rollins, 133 AD2d 205 [1987]), the responsible defendants must share exclusive control of the instrumentality causing injury.

2014Although res ipsa loquitur may be utilized where more than one defendant may have been in control (see Kerber v Sarles, 151 AD2d 1031 [1989]; Butti v Rollins, 133 AD2d 205 [1987]), the responsible defendants must share exclusive control of the instrumentality causing injury.

22014–2014
Kerber v. Sarles green
nyappdiv · 1989
2 sentences

2014Although res ipsa loquitur may be utilized where more than one defendant may have been in control (see Kerber v Sarles, 151 AD2d 1031 [1989]; Butti v Rollins, 133 AD2d 205 [1987]), the responsible defendants must share exclusive control of the instrumentality causing injury.

2014Although res ipsa loquitur may be utilized where more than one defendant may have been in control (see Kerber v Sarles, 151 AD2d 1031 [1989]; Butti v Rollins, 133 AD2d 205 [1987]), the responsible defendants must share exclusive control of the instrumentality causing injury.

22014–2014
Gabler v. Isaac Goldman Co. neutral
nyappdiv · 1926
1 sentence

1943The plaintiff relies on the principle laid down in such cases as Gabler v. Goldman Co. ( 215 App. Div. 333 ).

11943–1943
Grandison v. Robertson green
ca2 · 1916
1 sentence

1938(Bovay v. Fuller, 63 F. [2d] 280, 283; Case v. McKinnis, 107 Ore. 223 ; 213 P. 422 ; Grandison v. Robertson, 231 Fed. 785 .) The plaintiff relies on waiver.

11938–1938
Case v. McKinnis green
or · 1923
2 sentences

1938(Bovay v. Fuller, 63 F. [2d] 280, 283; Case v. McKinnis, 107 Ore. 223 ; 213 P. 422 ; Grandison v. Robertson, 231 Fed. 785 .) The plaintiff relies on waiver.

1938(Bovay v. Fuller, 63 F. [2d] 280, 283; Case v. McKinnis, 107 Ore. 223 ; 213 P. 422 ; Grandison v. Robertson, 231 Fed. 785 .) The plaintiff relies on waiver.

11938–1938
Johnson v. . Oppenheim green
ny · 1873
1 sentence

1915To sustain the claim of waiver, the plaintiff relies on the rule that the defendants having based their refusal to perform on the ground that the money was not paid before 12 o’clock, they could not thereafter relieve themselves from liability, upon the ground that the purchaser did not offer to assume the mortgage, citing Johnson v. Oppenheim ( 55 N. Y. 280 ); Mooney v. Elder ( 56 N. Y. 238 ); Duclos v. Cunningham ( 102 N. Y. 678 ).

11915–1915
Duclos v. . Cunningham green
ny · 1886
1 sentence

1915To sustain the claim of waiver, the plaintiff relies on the rule that the defendants having based their refusal to perform on the ground that the money was not paid before 12 o’clock, they could not thereafter relieve themselves from liability, upon the ground that the purchaser did not offer to assume the mortgage, citing Johnson v. Oppenheim ( 55 N. Y. 280 ); Mooney v. Elder ( 56 N. Y. 238 ); Duclos v. Cunningham ( 102 N. Y. 678 ).

11915–1915
Mooney v. . Elder green
ny · 1874
1 sentence

1915To sustain the claim of waiver, the plaintiff relies on the rule that the defendants having based their refusal to perform on the ground that the money was not paid before 12 o’clock, they could not thereafter relieve themselves from liability, upon the ground that the purchaser did not offer to assume the mortgage, citing Johnson v. Oppenheim ( 55 N. Y. 280 ); Mooney v. Elder ( 56 N. Y. 238 ); Duclos v. Cunningham ( 102 N. Y. 678 ).

11915–1915

Where else courts name it

CT 21 (1955–2020) MA 6 (1908–2026) NY 5 (1915–2014) CA 4 (1908–1951) IL 3 (1989–2000) KS 3 (1921–2006) LA 3 (1945–1961) OK 3 (1923–1961) NC 3 (1957–1994) TN 2 (1924–2004) TX 2 (1970–2003) OR 2 (1925–1967) MD 2 (1957–1971)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check