Hallmark Construction Corp. v. Suffolk County Water Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Hallmark Construction Corp. v. Suffolk County Water Authority

4 A.D.2d 936, 167 N.Y.S.2d 529, 1957 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4060

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

DecidedNovember 6, 1957

StatusPublished

This text of 4 A.D.2d 936 (Hallmark Construction Corp. v. Suffolk County Water Authority) 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

Hallmark Construction Corp. v. Suffolk County Water Authority, 4 A.D.2d 936, 167 N.Y.S.2d 529, 1957 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4060 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1957).

Pincite

Opinion

In this action for rescission of a contract, the defendant appeals from an order denying a motion to dismiss the amended complaint pursuant to rule 106 of the Rules of Civil Practice upon the ground that the pleading on its face fails to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. The plaintiff failed during two terms of this court to file points in support of its contention, although the appeal was adjourned for that very purpose. In this situation, we are unaware of the legal basis for plaintiff’s allegations. Accordingly, the order is unanimously reversed and the complaint dismissed for insufficiency, with leave to replead. Settle order on lotice. Concur — Peck, P. J., Botein, Frank, Valente and McNally, JJ.

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

In this action for rescission of a contract, the defendant appeals from an order denying a motion to dismiss the amended complaint pursuant to rule 106 of the Rules of Civil Practice upon the ground that the pleading on its face fails to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. The plaintiff failed during two terms of this court to file points in support of its contention, although the appeal was adjourned for that very purpose. In this situation, we are unaware of the legal basis for plaintiff’s allegations. Accordingly, the order is unanimously reversed and the complaint dismissed for insufficiency, with leave to replead. Settle order on lotice. Concur — Peck, P. J., Botein, Frank, Valente and McNally, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

4 A.D.2d 936, 167 N.Y.S.2d 529, 1957 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4060, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hallmark-construction-corp-v-suffolk-county-water-authority-nyappdiv-1957.