D'Angelo v. Bob Hastings Oldsmobile, Inc.
Cases that cite this one
16 later published cases cite this decision.
- Dornberger v. Metropolitan Life Insurance (District Court, S.D. New York 1997)
- United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit (2d Cir. 1995)
- Banque Arabe et Internationale D'Investissement v. Maryland National Bank (2d Cir. 1995)
- Allen v. Westpoint-Pepperell, Incorporated (2d Cir. 1991)
- Allen v. Westpoint-Pepperell, Inc. (2d Cir. 1991)
- Rush v. Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. (District Court, S.D. New York 1988)
- Yong Xu v. 401 Foster Gasoline, Inc. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2026)
- People v. Credit Suisse Sec. (N.Y. 2018)
- Board of Managers of the Soundings Condominium v. Foerster (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2016)
- Jack Kelly Partners LLC v. Zegelstein (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2016)
- Steen v. Bump (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1996)
- Nationwide Mutual Insurance v. Hausen (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1988)
- Polito v. Polito (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1986)
- Bank of Castile v. Salerno (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1984)
- Ernst Steel Corp. v. Horn Construction Division (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1984)
- Farash v. Sykes Datatronics, Inc. (N.Y. 1983)
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
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.
The findings of fact made by the trial court with respect to plaintiff’s right to recover in his action for equitable rescission grounded in fraud, having been affirmed at the Appellate Division, may not be disturbed in our court, there being evidence in the record for their support, and such findings are sufficient as a matter of law to establish plaintiff’s right to recover in that action. With respect to defendant’s counterclaim for damages based on an alleged implied contract for storage, the determination of the Appellate Division that the proof was insufficient to establish such a contract more nearly comports with the weight of the evidence.
Order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.