Avey v. Town of Brant
Cases that cite this one
9 later published cases cite this decision.
- J. Richard Dirose v. Pk Management Corp., Nicholas A. Demare, Frank Ciccarelli, John S. Russo, Harry Kursh, Anthony Curatolo and Jerome Dansker (2d Cir. 1982)
- United States v. Twenty Miljam-350 IED Jammers (2d Cir. 2011)
- Hammelburger v. Foursome Inn Corp. (N.Y. 1981)
- Blumenfeld v. Harris (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1957)
- United States Envelope Co. v. City of New York (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1956)
- Lupo v. Columbia Manicure Manufacturing Co. (New York Supreme Court 1956)
- Taylor v. Ziff-Davis Publishing Co. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1952)
- Garber v. City of New York (City of New York Municipal Court 1938)
- Al Raschid v. News Syndicate Co. (N.Y. 1934)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
Payments coerced by duress may be recovered back. “ The coercion, however, must be illegal, unjust or oppressive.” (Deshong v. City of New York, 176 N. Y. 475, 479.) The complaint alleges no facts showing that it was illegal, unjust dr oppressive for. the town to attempt to collect moneys apparently due to it from the Supervisor. The words “ wrongfully claimed ” state a mere conclusion and do not imply that defendant knew that plaintiff had expended the money for authorized town purposes. All that is alleged is consistent with threats to enforce what the town believed to be its legal rights, which do not constitute duress. (Benson v. Monroe, 61 Mass. 125, 131.)
The order of the Appellate Division and that of the Special Term should be reversed, the question certified answered in the negative and the- complaint dismissed, with costs in all courts. The plaintiff may have thirty days in which to serve an amended complaint on payment of costs.
Pound, Ch. J., Crane, Lehman, Kellogg, O’Brien and Hubbs, JJ., concur; Crouch, J., dissents.
Ordered accordingly.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.