Rabinowitz v. Pizer

108 N.Y.S. 994
New York Supreme Court·Decided February 19, 1908·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

FITZGERALD, J.

In Matter of Abraham v. Goldberg, 6 Misc. Rep. 43, 25 N. Y. Supp. 1113, the attention of the learned court seems not to have been directed to the question of public policy, and the demurrer herein must be sustained, for the reason that the agreement attempted to be made was void under well-settled authority. Knauss v. Krueger Brewing Co., 142 N. Y. 70, 36 N. E. 867; Carman v. Beach, 63 N. Y. 97; Robinson v. Clock, 38 App. Div. 67, 55 N. Y. Supp. 976; Auerbach v. Curie, 119 App. Div. 175, 104 N. Y. Supp. 233.

Demurrer sustained, with costs.

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

Rabinowitz v. Pizer, 108 N.Y.S. 994 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1908).

108 N.Y.S. 994 (Rabinowitz v. Pizer) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Burton v. PET, INCORPORATED
509 S.W.2d 95 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1974)
Rosenberg v. Lawrence
75 P.2d 1082 (California Supreme Court, 1938)
Galitzka v. Fields
137 N.Y.S. 828 (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 1912)