Hottenroth v. Shelley

150 Misc. 380, 268 N.Y.S. 667, 1934 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1043
CourtNew York Supreme Court
DecidedJanuary 5, 1934
StatusPublished

This text of 150 Misc. 380 (Hottenroth v. Shelley) 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
Hottenroth v. Shelley, 150 Misc. 380, 268 N.Y.S. 667, 1934 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1043 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1934).

Opinion

Levy, J.

Allegations that the plaintiff “ fulfilled all the terms and conditions of said agreement,” and that he duly fulfilled all the terms and conditions of said agreement ” are not equivalent to an allegation that the plaintiff “ duly performed all the conditions ” required by rule 92 of the Rules of Civil Practice. This motion to dismiss the complaint for insufficiency as to the moving defendant is accordingly granted, with ten dollars costs, with leave to serve an amended complaint within ten days from the service of a copy of this order, with notice of entry, upon payment of ten dollars additional costs.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
150 Misc. 380, 268 N.Y.S. 667, 1934 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1043, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hottenroth-v-shelley-nysupct-1934.