Leiserson v. Mabro International, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Leiserson v. Mabro International, Inc.

34 A.D.2d 925, 313 N.Y.S.2d 628, 1970 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4464

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

DecidedJune 16, 1970

StatusPublished

This text of 34 A.D.2d 925 (Leiserson v. Mabro International, Inc.) 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

Leiserson v. Mabro International, Inc., 34 A.D.2d 925, 313 N.Y.S.2d 628, 1970 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4464 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1970).

Pincite

Opinion

Order entered February 10, 1970 granting motion to dismiss the first cause of action of the amended complaint with leave to serve a second amended complaint unanimously modified on the law and the facts, and in the exercise of discretion, with leave, however, to the plaintiff to apply at Special Term on adequate papers for leave to replead, and as so modified, affirmed, without costs and without disbursements. On such application plaintiff shall submit a proposed pleading supplying the deficiencies and evidentially demonstrate the cause of action is well grounded. (Cushman é Wake-[926]*926field v. John David, Inc., 25 A D 2d 133, 135.) Concur — McGivem, J. P., Markewich, McNally and Tilzer, JJ.

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

Order entered February 10, 1970 granting motion to dismiss the first cause of action of the amended complaint with leave to serve a second amended complaint unanimously modified on the law and the facts, and in the exercise of discretion, with leave, however, to the plaintiff to apply at Special Term on adequate papers for leave to replead, and as so modified, affirmed, without costs and without disbursements. On such application plaintiff shall submit a proposed pleading supplying the deficiencies and evidentially demonstrate the cause of action is well grounded. (Cushman é Wake-[926]*926field v. John David, Inc., 25 A D 2d 133, 135.) Concur — McGivem, J. P., Markewich, McNally and Tilzer, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

34 A.D.2d 925, 313 N.Y.S.2d 628, 1970 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4464, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/leiserson-v-mabro-international-inc-nyappdiv-1970.