Flash v. Rummel

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Flash v. Rummel

250 A.D. 833, 294 N.Y.S. 990, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9209

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

DecidedMarch 24, 1937

StatusPublished

This text of 250 A.D. 833 (Flash v. Rummel) 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

Flash v. Rummel, 250 A.D. 833, 294 N.Y.S. 990, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9209 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1937).

Pincite

Opinion

Order so far as appealed from affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. Memorandum: Construing the complaint liberally as we are required to do, we find sufficient facts alleged, although inartistieally pleaded, to constitute a cause of action, on the basis of the existence of ineompetency of the plaintiff’s intestate to the knowledge of defendant at the time of the conveyance. All concur, except Thompson, J., not voting. (The order denies defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint as to the plaintiff in his individual capacity in an action for an accounting for property alleged to have been secured through fraud.) Present —■ Sears, P. J., Edgcomb, Thompson, Lewis and Cunningham, JJ.

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

Order so far as appealed from affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. Memorandum: Construing the complaint liberally as we are required to do, we find sufficient facts alleged, although inartistieally pleaded, to constitute a cause of action, on the basis of the existence of ineompetency of the plaintiff’s intestate to the knowledge of defendant at the time of the conveyance. All concur, except Thompson, J., not voting. (The order denies defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint as to the plaintiff in his individual capacity in an action for an accounting for property alleged to have been secured through fraud.) Present —■ Sears, P. J., Edgcomb, Thompson, Lewis and Cunningham, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

250 A.D. 833, 294 N.Y.S. 990, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9209, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/flash-v-rummel-nyappdiv-1937.