General
Elisabeth Helmig, Appellant, v. James Fanning, Doing Business under the Name and Style of Fanning Auto Renting Co., Respondent
255 A.D. 766·New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division·1938·NY
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
(October 21, 1938.)
Elisabeth Helmig, Appellant, v. James Fanning, Doing Business under the Name and Style of Fanning Auto Renting Co., Respondent.
[MAJORITY]
Allegations sufficient to constitute a cause of action were set forth in the complaint. It is quite apparent that the court misunderstood the opening statement of counsel for the plaintiff, otherwise the complaint would not have been dismissed without the introduction of any testimony. Judgment unanimously reversed and a new trial ordered, with costs to the appellant to abide the event. Present — Martin, P. J., O’Malley, Glennon, Untermyer and Callahan, JJ.