Cohen v. City Co. of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Cohen v. City Co. of New York

258 A.D. 788, 16 N.Y.S.2d 100, 1939 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6917

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

DecidedNovember 17, 1939

StatusPublished

This text of 258 A.D. 788 (Cohen v. City Co. of New York) 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

Cohen v. City Co. of New York, 258 A.D. 788, 16 N.Y.S.2d 100, 1939 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6917 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1939).

Pincite

Opinion

Order and judgment affirmed, with costs. No opinion. Martin, P. J., Glennon, Untermyer and Dore, JJ., concur. Untermyer, J.; I concur in the affirmance. (See Restatement, Restitution, chap. 1, § 5, subd. b; Id. chap. 7, Introductory Note, p. 523.) Callahan, J., dissents and votes to reverse and deny the motion on the ground that the substance of the action and the nature of the right should determine the question whether the Statute of Limitations is a bar.

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

Order and judgment affirmed, with costs. No opinion. Martin, P. J., Glennon, Untermyer and Dore, JJ., concur. Untermyer, J.; I concur in the affirmance. (See Restatement, Restitution, chap. 1, § 5, subd. b; Id. chap. 7, Introductory Note, p. 523.) Callahan, J., dissents and votes to reverse and deny the motion on the ground that the substance of the action and the nature of the right should determine the question whether the Statute of Limitations is a bar.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

258 A.D. 788, 16 N.Y.S.2d 100, 1939 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6917, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cohen-v-city-co-of-new-york-nyappdiv-1939.