Mitchell v. Murphy

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Mitchell v. Murphy

283 A.D. 803, 128 N.Y.S.2d 456, 1954 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5376

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

DecidedMarch 8, 1954

StatusPublished

This text of 283 A.D. 803 (Mitchell v. Murphy) 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

Mitchell v. Murphy, 283 A.D. 803, 128 N.Y.S.2d 456, 1954 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5376 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1954).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action brought to rescind a pension contract between plaintiff, a retired police officer of the City of New York, and defendants, members of the board of trustees of the police pension fund of the City of New York, plaintiff appeals from an order granting defendants’ motion for summary judgment. Order unanimously affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. Appellant alleged in his complaint that his application for retirement, which was made on the basis of twenty years of service, and the acceptance thereof by respondents, who awarded him a pension based on such service, occurred under a mutual mistake of fact as to appellant’s physical condition. In our opinion the documentary proof submitted by respondents on their motion for summary judgment established prima facie the truth of their denials that any mistake of fact, mutual or unilateral, existed as to the nature and contents of the applica[804]*804tion for retirement or the acceptance thereof, and appellant failed to show any facts sufficient to raise an issue with respect to the verity or conclusiveness of such proof. Present — Nolan, P. J., Adel, Wenzel, Schmidt and Beldoek, JJ.

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

In an action brought to rescind a pension contract between plaintiff, a retired police officer of the City of New York, and defendants, members of the board of trustees of the police pension fund of the City of New York, plaintiff appeals from an order granting defendants’ motion for summary judgment. Order unanimously affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. Appellant alleged in his complaint that his application for retirement, which was made on the basis of twenty years of service, and the acceptance thereof by respondents, who awarded him a pension based on such service, occurred under a mutual mistake of fact as to appellant’s physical condition. In our opinion the documentary proof submitted by respondents on their motion for summary judgment established prima facie the truth of their denials that any mistake of fact, mutual or unilateral, existed as to the nature and contents of the applica[804]*804tion for retirement or the acceptance thereof, and appellant failed to show any facts sufficient to raise an issue with respect to the verity or conclusiveness of such proof. Present — Nolan, P. J., Adel, Wenzel, Schmidt and Beldoek, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

283 A.D. 803, 128 N.Y.S.2d 456, 1954 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5376, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mitchell-v-murphy-nyappdiv-1954.