The Gutta Percha and Rubber Manufacturing Co. v. . Holman

New York Court of Appeals

The Gutta Percha and Rubber Manufacturing Co. v. . Holman

101 N.E. 885, 208 N.Y. 583, 1913 N.Y. LEXIS 1178

CourtNew York Court of Appeals

DecidedApril 29, 1913

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 101 N.E. 885 (The Gutta Percha and Rubber Manufacturing Co. v. . Holman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

The Gutta Percha and Rubber Manufacturing Co. v. . Holman, 101 N.E. 885, 208 N.Y. 583, 1913 N.Y. LEXIS 1178 (N.Y. 1913).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

While there is much in the complaint that affords no ground for cause of action against the defendant, still there are other allegations therein that would tend to establish not Only unlawful conduct on his part, but acts done that become unlawful through the motives and purposes for which they were committed; and also while much of the prayer for relief seeks to restrain acts which we think were in the power of the defendant to do without being answerable in law therefor, yet the effect of the prayer for relief, even though it seeks results that cannot be granted, does not prevent the plaintiff from recovering such relief as the proof in its entirety will show it to be entitled to.

The order should be affirmed, with costs, and question certified answered in the affirmative.

Gtjllen, Oh. J., Gray, Werner, Hiscock, Collin and Ouddeback, JJ., concur; Miller, J., not sitting.

Order affirmed.

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

Per Curiam.

While there is much in the complaint that affords no ground for cause of action against the defendant, still there are other allegations therein that would tend to establish not Only unlawful conduct on his part, but acts done that become unlawful through the motives and purposes for which they were committed; and also while much of the prayer for relief seeks to restrain acts which we think were in the power of the defendant to do without being answerable in law therefor, yet the effect of the prayer for relief, even though it seeks results that cannot be granted, does not prevent the plaintiff from recovering such relief as the proof in its entirety will show it to be entitled to.

The order should be affirmed, with costs, and question certified answered in the affirmative.

Gtjllen, Oh. J., Gray, Werner, Hiscock, Collin and Ouddeback, JJ., concur; Miller, J., not sitting.

Order affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

101 N.E. 885, 208 N.Y. 583, 1913 N.Y. LEXIS 1178, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/the-gutta-percha-and-rubber-manufacturing-co-v-holman-ny-1913.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack