From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hale v. Triest

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 1, 1912
151 App. Div. 930 (N.Y. App. Div. 1912)

Opinion

June, 1912.

Present — Ingraham, P.J., McLaughlin, Scott, Miller and Dowling, JJ. McLaughlin and Dowling, JJ., dissented upon the ground that this court has heretofore held that the complaint served did not state a cause of action, and there are no additional facts set up in the moving papers.


We think, upon the facts disclosed, that the plaintiff was entitled to examine the defendants to ascertain the facts to enable him to serve an amended complaint. The order appealed from is, therefore, reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and the motion denied, with ten dollars costs.


Order reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion denied, with ten dollars costs.


Summaries of

Hale v. Triest

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 1, 1912
151 App. Div. 930 (N.Y. App. Div. 1912)
Case details for

Hale v. Triest

Case Details

Full title:CARLETON HALE, Appellant, v . HANS TRIEST and Others, Respondents

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Jun 1, 1912

Citations

151 App. Div. 930 (N.Y. App. Div. 1912)