Dhooge Bros. v. Mecho
Dhooge Bros., Inc. v. Joaquin P. Mecho
Dhooge Bros. v. Mecho, 15 A.D.2d 774 (1962)
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
Plaintiff has failed to set forth sufficient facts establishing misrepresentation or fraud on the part of the moving defendant who was not a party to the contract. “ Fraud cannot be inferred, it must be proved.” (Anderson v. Malley, 191 App. Div. 573, 575 .) Concur — Botein, P. J., Breitel, Valente, McNally and Eager, JJ.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 2 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
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.