Stagg Warehouse & Distributing Co. v. Van Munching & Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Stagg Warehouse & Distributing Co. v. Van Munching & Co.

51 A.D.2d 735, 378 N.Y.S.2d 1022, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11237

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

DecidedFebruary 2, 1976

StatusPublished

This text of 51 A.D.2d 735 (Stagg Warehouse & Distributing Co. v. Van Munching & 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

Stagg Warehouse & Distributing Co. v. Van Munching & Co., 51 A.D.2d 735, 378 N.Y.S.2d 1022, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11237 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action inter alia to recover damages for breach of contract, defendant Van Munching & Company, Inc., appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated September 18, 1975, which denied its motion for summary judgment and to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a cause of action. Order affirmed, with $50 costs and disbursements. The allegations of the complaint, liberally construed, are sufficient to support some of plaintiff’s theories of recovery. In addition, the papers submitted on the motion presented triable issues of fact warranting Special Term’s denial of summary judgment to appellant. Cohalan, Acting P. J., Margett, Damiani, Shapiro and Hawkins, JJ., concur.

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

In an action inter alia to recover damages for breach of contract, defendant Van Munching & Company, Inc., appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated September 18, 1975, which denied its motion for summary judgment and to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a cause of action. Order affirmed, with $50 costs and disbursements. The allegations of the complaint, liberally construed, are sufficient to support some of plaintiff’s theories of recovery. In addition, the papers submitted on the motion presented triable issues of fact warranting Special Term’s denial of summary judgment to appellant. Cohalan, Acting P. J., Margett, Damiani, Shapiro and Hawkins, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

51 A.D.2d 735, 378 N.Y.S.2d 1022, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11237, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stagg-warehouse-distributing-co-v-van-munching-co-nyappdiv-1976.