STITT v. GOLD


33 Misc.2d 273 (1962)

Earl H. Stitt, Plaintiff, v. John Gold, Defendant.

Supreme Court, Special Term, Queens County.

January 19, 1962


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Garbarini & Kroll for defendant. Carl K. Harten for plaintiff.


JAMES J. CONROY, J.

This is a motion pursuant to rule 107 of the Rules of Civil Practice to dismiss the complaint on the ground (1) that the action was not commenced within the time limited by the Statute of Limitations and (2) there is another action pending between the parties for the same cause.

The defendant in support of his motion contends that the complaint herein alleges a cause of action for malpractice, even though on its face it sounds...

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