From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Doucas v. Manfried

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 1, 1927
220 App. Div. 811 (N.Y. App. Div. 1927)

Opinion

June, 1927.

Appeal from Supreme Court, New York County.

Present — Dowling, P.J., Merrell, Martin, O'Malley and Proskauer, JJ. Order reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion denied, with ten dollars costs, with leave to the defendants to answer within twenty days from service of order upon payment of said costs.


While the allegations of this complaint may be improbable on the assumption of their truth necessary for the disposition of this appeal, they sufficiently charge the inability of the plaintiff to procure in the open market the bonds which are the subject-matter of the contract sought to be specifically enforced. A cause of action is thus stated. The order appealed from should be reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and the motion to dismiss the amended complaint denied, with ten dollars costs, with leave to the defendants to answer within twenty days upon payment of said costs.


Summaries of

Doucas v. Manfried

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 1, 1927
220 App. Div. 811 (N.Y. App. Div. 1927)
Case details for

Doucas v. Manfried

Case Details

Full title:STELIOS DOUCAS, Appellant, v. LAZARUS MANFRIED and Others, Doing Business…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Jun 1, 1927

Citations

220 App. Div. 811 (N.Y. App. Div. 1927)

Citing Cases

Levinson v. State of New York

In determining the motion for dismissal for failure to state a cause of action, the court considers only the…

Levinson v. State of New York

Nothing more is necessary — a cause of action is stated. If the ownership of the right of way by claimants is…