Heaney v. Purdy

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Heaney v. Purdy

30 A.D.2d 773, 292 N.Y.S.2d 336, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3629

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

DecidedJune 27, 1968

StatusPublished

This text of 30 A.D.2d 773 (Heaney v. Purdy) 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

Heaney v. Purdy, 30 A.D.2d 773, 292 N.Y.S.2d 336, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3629 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1968).

Pincite

Opinion

Order unanimously modified in accordance with the memorandum and as so modified affirmed, without costs. Memorandum: Defendants established by documentary evidence that plaintiff's third cause of action for malicious prosecution may not be maintained because the merits of the charge against plaintiff have not been passed upon and plaintiff has not been acquitted thereof. The order appealed from should, therefore, be modified by substituting for the words “ denied in all respects ” the words “ granted to the extent of dismissing the third cause of action and in all other respects denied.” No motion having been made under CPLR 3211 (subd. [a], par. 7) to dismiss for failure to state a cause of action, we do not pass upon that question. (Appeal from order of Erie Special Term denying motion to dismiss complaint.) Present—Bastow, P. J., Goldman, Marsh, Witmer and Henry, JJ.

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

Order unanimously modified in accordance with the memorandum and as so modified affirmed, without costs. Memorandum: Defendants established by documentary evidence that plaintiff's third cause of action for malicious prosecution may not be maintained because the merits of the charge against plaintiff have not been passed upon and plaintiff has not been acquitted thereof. The order appealed from should, therefore, be modified by substituting for the words “ denied in all respects ” the words “ granted to the extent of dismissing the third cause of action and in all other respects denied.” No motion having been made under CPLR 3211 (subd. [a], par. 7) to dismiss for failure to state a cause of action, we do not pass upon that question. (Appeal from order of Erie Special Term denying motion to dismiss complaint.) Present—Bastow, P. J., Goldman, Marsh, Witmer and Henry, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

30 A.D.2d 773, 292 N.Y.S.2d 336, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3629, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/heaney-v-purdy-nyappdiv-1968.