Taylor v. Markus

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Taylor v. Markus

224 A.D. 865

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

DecidedOctober 15, 1928

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 224 A.D. 865 (Taylor v. Markus) 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

Taylor v. Markus, 224 A.D. 865 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1928).

Pincite

Opinion

Order denying motion of defendant Umans to dismiss amended complaint as against him reversed upon the law and the facts, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion granted, with ten dollars costs. The action is brought for rescission; and while plaintiff may have an action at law against defendant Umans for damages, he may not maintain the action for rescission, because Umans was not a party to the contract. (Ritzwoller v. Lurie, 225 N. Y. 464.) Lazansky, P. J., Rich, Kapper, Hagarty and Carswell, JJ., concur.

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

Order denying motion of defendant Umans to dismiss amended complaint as against him reversed upon the law and the facts, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion granted, with ten dollars costs. The action is brought for rescission; and while plaintiff may have an action at law against defendant Umans for damages, he may not maintain the action for rescission, because Umans was not a party to the contract. (Ritzwoller v. Lurie, 225 N. Y. 464.) Lazansky, P. J., Rich, Kapper, Hagarty and Carswell, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

224 A.D. 865, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/taylor-v-markus-nyappdiv-1928.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack