Futherer v. Angelidis

261 A.D. 876, 25 N.Y.S.2d 207, 1941 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7855
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided January 8, 1941·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, upon the ground that the twenty-year, and not the six-year, Statute of Limitations applies to the cause of action set forth in the complaint. (See Civ. Prac. Act, §§ 47, 48; Atlantic Dock Co. v. Leavitt, 54 N. Y. 35; Bowen v. Beck, 94 id. 86; Hyde v. Miller, 45 App. Div. 396; Quackenbush v. Mapes, No. 1, 123 id. 242; Hulbert v. Clark, 57 Hun, 558; affd., 128 N. Y. 295; Greenly v. Greenly, 114 App. Div. 640; Anguish v. Blair, 160 id. 52; affd., 216 N. Y. 746.) All concur. (The order denies defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint in an action to recover installments of interest on a bond secured by a second mortgage.) Present — Cunningham, Taylor, Dowling, Harris and McCurn, JJ.

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

Futherer v. Angelidis, 261 A.D. 876, 25 N.Y.S.2d 207, 1941 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7855 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1941).

261 A.D. 876 (Futherer v. Angelidis) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Ernst v. Schaack
271 A.D.2d 1012 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1947)
Eyeington v. Pardee
184 Misc. 803 (New York County Courts, 1945)
Onondaga County Savings Bank v. Markson Bros.
182 Misc. 954 (New York County Courts, 1941)