Imperatrice v. Imperatrice

New York Court of Appeals
Imperatrice v. Imperatrice, 81 N.E.2d 95 (N.Y. 1948)
298 N.Y. 549
CoNway, DesmoNd, Dye, Fuld, Lewis, LoughraN, Thacher

Imperatrice v. Imperatrice

Opinion of the Court

*550 Per Curiam.

Since the first cause of action, sounding in equity, is valid and since defendants’ motion under rule 106 of the Rules of Civil Practice seeks dismissal of the entire complaint, the motion was properly denied. (See Advance Music Corp. v. American Tobacco Co., 296 N. Y. 79, 84; Eidlitz v. Fischbach & Moore, Inc., 239 App. Div. 483, 486; Fusco v. Brooks, 263 App. Div. 845.) We neither consider nor pass upon the sufficiency of the other causes of action,' nor the nature of the judgment to which plaintiff may be entitled.

The order should be affirmed, costs. The question certified should be answered in the affirmative.

LoughraN, Ch. J., Lewis, DesmoNd, Thacher, Dye and Fuld, JJ., concur; CoNway, J., taking no part.

Order affirmed, etc.

Reference

Full Case Name
Anna Imperatrice, Respondent, v. Antonio Imperatrice Et Al., Appellants, Et Al., Defendants
Cited By
16 cases
Status
Published