STEINTHAL v. COHN


16 N.Y.2d 767 (1965)

Martin B. Steinthal et al., Respondents, v. Roy M. Cohn, Appellant.

Court of Appeals of the State of New York.

Decided July 9, 1965.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Frank G. Raichle, Frank S. Polestino and Robert S. Cohen for appellant.

J. Howard Carter, Lee W. Meyer and Ronald S. Daniels for respondents.

Concur: Chief Judge DESMOND and Judges DYE, BURKE and BERGAN. Judge VAN VOORHIS dissents in the following opinion in which Judges FULD and SCILEPPI concur.


Order affirmed, with costs.

VAN VOORHIS, J. (dissenting).

The question presented to us on this appeal is whether plaintiffs were entitled to summary judgment. Defendant-appellant contends that he is entitled to a trial in order to resolve what he asserts are at least ambiguities in the written agreement on which he has been held, as well as concerning the measure and amount of damage. In both of these respects it seems to me that he is correct...

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