Broderick v. Aaron

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Broderick v. Aaron

260 A.D. 907, 24 N.Y.S.2d 140, 1940 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5320

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedNovember 1, 1940

StatusPublished

This text of 260 A.D. 907 (Broderick v. Aaron) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Broderick v. Aaron, 260 A.D. 907, 24 N.Y.S.2d 140, 1940 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5320 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1940).

Pincite

Opinion

The rule against splitting causes of action is in the nature of a rule to prevent vexatious and oppressive litigation. To permit the opening of the original judgment many years after it was paid and long after the second action was tried would defeat the purpose of the rule. In the exercise of discretion the motion should be denied. Order unanimously reversed, with twenty dollars costs and disbursements, and the motion denied. Present — Martin, P. J., Townley, Untermyer and Callahan, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

The rule against splitting causes of action is in the nature of a rule to prevent vexatious and oppressive litigation. To permit the opening of the original judgment many years after it was paid and long after the second action was tried would defeat the purpose of the rule. In the exercise of discretion the motion should be denied. Order unanimously reversed, with twenty dollars costs and disbursements, and the motion denied. Present — Martin, P. J., Townley, Untermyer and Callahan, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

260 A.D. 907, 24 N.Y.S.2d 140, 1940 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5320, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/broderick-v-aaron-nyappdiv-1940.