Holzer v. Deutsche Reichsbahn-Gesellschaft

160 Misc. 487, 290 N.Y.S. 16, 1936 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1261
CourtNew York Supreme Court
DecidedFebruary 3, 1936
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 160 Misc. 487 (Holzer v. Deutsche Reichsbahn-Gesellschaft) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Holzer v. Deutsche Reichsbahn-Gesellschaft, 160 Misc. 487, 290 N.Y.S. 16, 1936 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1261 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1936).

Opinion

McLaughlin (Charles B.), J.

Motion to vacate attachment. Cross-motion to cure a jeofaile if such exists is granted. Since People ex rel. Durham Realty Co. v. Cantor (234 N. Y. 507), the court can cure any defect in aid of justice. All technicalities are swept aside.

The facts involve interlocking corporations in Germany. From the original affidavit alone it appears that the parent company through its officers had such a control over its subsidiaries that the corporate existence of the subsidiaries was wholly disregarded and employment contracts with the subsidiaries were dictated by the parent and ratified with abject obedience by the subsidiaries. Those who had the power to hire likewise exercised, assumed or usurped the power to discharge. That was likewise ratified with abject subservience by the subsidiary. The curing affidavit is not much more than a brief on the facts making clear the above.

The motion to vacate is denied.

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

Related

Valenza v. State
14 Misc. 2d 128 (New York State Court of Claims, 1942)
Moran Towing & Transportation Co. v. Fleming
175 Misc. 408 (New York Supreme Court, 1940)
Holzer v. Deutsche Reichsbahn Gesellschaft
160 Misc. 597 (New York Supreme Court, 1936)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
160 Misc. 487, 290 N.Y.S. 16, 1936 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1261, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/holzer-v-deutsche-reichsbahn-gesellschaft-nysupct-1936.