1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. A.D.2d
  4. 162 A.D.2d
  5. 162 A.D.2d 230 (1990)
 

URBAN HOLDING CORP. v. HABERMAN

162 A.D.2d 230 (1990)

Urban Holding Corporation, Plaintiff and Counterclaim Defendant-Respondent-Appellant, v. Steven B. Haberman, Defendant and Counterclaim Plaintiff-Appellant-Respondent. Arthur B. Malman et al., Counterclaim Defendants-Respondents-Appellants

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

June 14, 1990

Under CPLR 3211 (a) (7), a motion to dismiss is properly granted if the pleading fails to state a cause of action and is, therefore, defective on its face. (See, Siegel, NY Prac § 265.) As Judge Cooke succinctly stated in this regard, "[i]nitially, the sole criterion is whether the pleading states a cause of action, and if from its four corners factual allegations are discerned which taken together manifest any cause of action cognizable at law a motion for dismissal...

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