TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Brown v. Father Divine

Verinda Brown, in Her Own Behalf and in Behalf of All Other Members of the Father Divine Peace Mission, Similarly Situated, and Verinda Brown, Individually v. Father Divine, Individually

Brown v. Father Divine, 260 A.D. 443 (1940)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · State Appellate Courts
Decided
November 1, 1940
Citations
260 A.D. 44323 N.Y.S.2d 1161940 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4620

Opinion of the Court

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Per Curiam.

We believe that facts sufficient to sustain the cause of action in equity are to be found in this record. In addition to the reasons assigned by the trial justice, it should be noted that the defendant failed to set forth facts in his answer showing that an adequate remedy at law existed. In Baron v. Korn ( 127 N. Y. 224 ) Judge Parker said in part: “If the question whether the plaintiff ought to have been required to establish his title in an action at law were properly reviewable here, it need not be considered, because the defendant did not, by his answer, object that the plaintiffs had an adequate remedy at law. After parties have submitted to the jurisdiction of the court, the plaintiff will not be turned out to seek his remedy elsewhere, when the objection is taken for the first time at the trial.” Again in Bloomquist v. Farson ( 222 N. Y. 375 ) Judge Crane wrote in part: “ The complaints having alleged causes of action in equity and the proof offered having established facts which justified equitable relief, an adequate remedy at law could not be urged as a defense unless pleaded. Such objection cannot be raised for the first time on motions to dismiss.”

*444 The judgment so far as appealed from should be affirmed, with costs.

Present — Martin, P. J., O’Malley, Townley, Glennon and Untermyer, JJ.

Judgment, so far as appealed from, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

How later courts describe this case

Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 1 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.

  • (spiritual advisor who falsely represented that he would deposit plaintiff’s money in his “Heavenly Treasure” and return it to her on demand holds funds as constructive trustee)
1941: 11951: 11995: 12007: 119412026peak 1941 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Love v. Love (In re Love)182 B.R. 161 (Bankr. W.D. Ky. 1995)
  2. Maffei v. Roman Catholic Archbishop449 Mass. 235 (2007)
  3. Brown v. Father Divine176 Misc. 10 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1941)
  4. In re the Arbitration between Block200 Misc. 473 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1951)

Most recent

  1. Maffei v. Roman Catholic Archbishop449 Mass. 235 (2007)
  2. Love v. Love (In re Love)182 B.R. 161 (Bankr. W.D. Ky. 1995)
  3. In re the Arbitration between Block200 Misc. 473 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1951)
  4. Brown v. Father Divine176 Misc. 10 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1941)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 2

DepthCaseCited by
Bloomquist v. Farson, 118 N.E. 855 (N.Y. 1918) 101
Baron v. Korn, 27 N.E. 804 (N.Y. 1891) 33

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list