Alliance Insurance v. Budlong

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Alliance Insurance v. Budlong

258 A.D. 776, 14 N.Y.S.2d 829, 1939 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6839

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedOctober 4, 1939

StatusPublished

This text of 258 A.D. 776 (Alliance Insurance v. Budlong) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Alliance Insurance v. Budlong, 258 A.D. 776, 14 N.Y.S.2d 829, 1939 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6839 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1939).

Pincite

Opinion

Order affirmed, 'with ten dollars costs and disbursements. Memorandum: The counterclaim alleges the technical requisites for an action in deceit. Anticipated difficulty in proving damages does not warrant our saying there are no damages. We, therefore, are of the opinion that the issues raised by the reply call for a determination at the Trial Term. All concur, except Taylor, J., who dissents and votes for reversal on the ground that in his opinion there is no basis for damages. (The order denies plaintiff’s motion to strike out defendant’s answer and for summary judgment, in an action, on a contract.) Present — Sears, P. J., Lewis, Cunningham, Taylor and Dowling, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Order affirmed, 'with ten dollars costs and disbursements. Memorandum: The counterclaim alleges the technical requisites for an action in deceit. Anticipated difficulty in proving damages does not warrant our saying there are no damages. We, therefore, are of the opinion that the issues raised by the reply call for a determination at the Trial Term. All concur, except Taylor, J., who dissents and votes for reversal on the ground that in his opinion there is no basis for damages. (The order denies plaintiff’s motion to strike out defendant’s answer and for summary judgment, in an action, on a contract.) Present — Sears, P. J., Lewis, Cunningham, Taylor and Dowling, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

258 A.D. 776, 14 N.Y.S.2d 829, 1939 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6839, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/alliance-insurance-v-budlong-nyappdiv-1939.