Pope v. Heckscher

152 Misc. 330, 274 N.Y.S. 343, 1933 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1839
CourtNew York Supreme Court
DecidedDecember 14, 1933
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 152 Misc. 330 (Pope v. Heckscher) 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
Pope v. Heckscher, 152 Misc. 330, 274 N.Y.S. 343, 1933 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1839 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1933).

Opinion

Levy, J.

In view of the allegation in paragraph 4 of the complaint, the first cause of action is sufficient. The situation is analogous to that presented in cases such as Hess v. Pawloski (274 U. S. 352), where a non-resident’s use of a State’s highway was treated as an implied consent to submit to the State’s jurisdiction for certain purposes. (See, also, Wuchter v. Pizzutti, 276 U. S. 13; Gilbert v. Burnstine, 255 N. Y. 348.) The motion to dismiss the first cause of action for failure to state cause of action is denied, with leave to answer within ten days from the service of a copy of this order, with notice of entry, upon payment of ten dollars costs within the same period.

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

Related

Pope v. Heckscher
242 A.D. 611 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1934)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
152 Misc. 330, 274 N.Y.S. 343, 1933 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1839, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pope-v-heckscher-nysupct-1933.