LUPO v. COLUMBIA MANICURE MFG. CO.


4 Misc.2d 413 (1956)

Adeline M. Lupo, as Administratrix of C. T. A. of S. Quentin Lupo, Deceased, Plaintiff, v. Columbia Manicure Mfg. Co., Inc., et al., Defendants.

Supreme Court, Special Term, Bronx County.

August 8, 1956.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Arthur H. Ellis for defendants.

Stanley Goldstein for plaintiff.


MATTHEW M. LEVY, J.

This is a motion by the defendants under rule 106 of the Rules of Civil Practice to dismiss each of three causes of action set forth in the complaint on the ground of insufficiency on its face; or, in the alternative, under rule 102, to require the service of an amended complaint making it more definite or certain in respect of the matters enumerated in the defendants' notice of motion.

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases