Home/Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York/Julius Schmid, Inc. v. Youngs

Julius Schmid, Inc. v. Youngs

249 A.D. 801, 292 N.Y.S. 529
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJanuary 15, 1937
StatusPublished

This text of 249 A.D. 801 (Julius Schmid, Inc. v. Youngs) 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
Julius Schmid, Inc. v. Youngs, 249 A.D. 801, 292 N.Y.S. 529 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1937).

Opinion

The matter pleaded in the second cause of action is so general that it cannot be said that it applies to plaintiff. (Feely v. Vitagraph Co., 184 App. Div. 527.) It may be, however, that plaintiff is able to plead a proper cause of action. (Gross v. Cantor, 270 N. Y. 93.) Order modified by striking out the second cause of action, and as so modified affirmed, without costs, with leave to the plaintiff to serve an amended complaint within ten days after service of order. No opinion. Present — Martin, P. J., Townley, Glennon,, Untermyer and Dore, JJ.

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

Related

Gross v. Cantor
200 N.E. 592 (New York Court of Appeals, 1936)
Feely v. Vitagraph Co.
184 A.D. 527 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1918)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
249 A.D. 801, 292 N.Y.S. 529, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/julius-schmid-inc-v-youngs-nyappdiv-1937.