1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. A.D.2d
  4. 102 A.D.2d
  5. 102 A.D.2d 742 (1984)
 

H & R HATS & NOVELTIES, INC. v. CITIBANK

102 A.D.2d 742 (1984)

H & R Hats and Novelties, Inc., Respondent, v. Citibank, N. A., Defendant, and Graham & James et al., Appellants

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Department.

June 19, 1984

¶ Special Term, in treating the motion of the defendant Graham & James, Esqs., as a motion pursuant to CPLR 3211 (subd [a], par 7) to dismiss for failure to state a cause of action, correctly determined that the allegations of the complaint are deemed to be true for purposes of such motion. That being the case, it is clear that the amended complaint states a cause of action against Graham & James. (Foley v D'Agostino, 21 A.D.2d 60

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