Langhoop v. Richfield Oil Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Langhoop v. Richfield Oil Corp.

259 A.D. 964, 21 N.Y.S.2d 416, 1940 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7440

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided May 8, 1940·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. Memorandum: Although the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur cannot be applied to the facts set forth in the complaints, such complaints and the bills of particulars do set forth facts sufficient, if proven, to constitute causes of action. All concur. (The order denies motion by two defendants for a dismissal of the complaint in each of three actions to recover damages for the death of three persons who died in a burning building.) Present — Crosby, P. J., Cunningham, Dowling, Harris and McCurn, JJ.

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

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. Memorandum: Although the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur cannot be applied to the facts set forth in the complaints, such complaints and the bills of particulars do set forth facts sufficient, if proven, to constitute causes of action. All concur. (The order denies motion by two defendants for a dismissal of the complaint in each of three actions to recover damages for the death of three persons who died in a burning building.) Present — Crosby, P. J., Cunningham, Dowling, Harris and McCurn, JJ.

Langhoop v. Richfield Oil Corp., 259 A.D. 964, 21 N.Y.S.2d 416, 1940 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7440 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1940).

Pincite

259 A.D. 964 (Langhoop v. Richfield Oil Corp.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related