Home/Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York/Scott v. Detroit & Cleveland Navigation Co.

Scott v. Detroit & Cleveland Navigation Co.

279 A.D. 975, 111 N.Y.S.2d 530, 1952 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5483
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMarch 12, 1952
StatusPublished

This text of 279 A.D. 975 (Scott v. Detroit & Cleveland Navigation Co.) 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
Scott v. Detroit & Cleveland Navigation Co., 279 A.D. 975, 111 N.Y.S.2d 530, 1952 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5483 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1952).

Opinion

Memorandum: The complaint fails to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. (See Beatty v. McCutcheon, 200 App. Div. 869.) A bill of particulars is no part of the pleadings and cannot enlarge a cause of action or perfect an imperfect pleading. (Dodge v. Weill, 158 N. Y. 346.) All concur. (Appeal from order denying defendant’s motion to dismiss plaintiff’s first cause of action, in a negligence action.) Present — 'Taylor, P. J., McCum, Vaughan, Kimball and Wheeler, JJ.

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

Related

Dodge v. . Weill
53 N.E. 33 (New York Court of Appeals, 1899)
Beatty v. McCutcheon
200 A.D. 869 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1922)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
279 A.D. 975, 111 N.Y.S.2d 530, 1952 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5483, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/scott-v-detroit-cleveland-navigation-co-nyappdiv-1952.