Mienik v. Mienik

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• cause of action accrues if plaintiff has knowledge of facts sufficient to suggest to a person of ordinary intelligence that he has been defrauded

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

3 cases in this archive cite this case.

• McCoy v. Goldberg
  S.D. New York· 1990-11-16· cited 35×
• DiIorio v. Gibson & Cushman of New York, Inc.
  Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York· 1990-05-29· cited 5×
• Proal v. Proal
  Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York· 1983-01-03

Cites

4 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• In re Rivette
  Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York· 1954-03-03· cited 8×
• Ackerman v. Ackerman
  New York Supreme Court· 1962-07-06· cited 6×
• Marks v. Marks
  Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York· 1954-06-18· cited 4×
• Jennings v. Jennings
  New York Supreme Court· 1946-07-12· cited 3×