Brown v. Father Divine

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Brown v. Father Divine

260 A.D. 443, 23 N.Y.S.2d 116, 1940 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4620

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

DecidedNovember 1, 1940

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 260 A.D. 443 (Brown v. Father Divine) 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

Brown v. Father Divine, 260 A.D. 443, 23 N.Y.S.2d 116, 1940 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4620 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1940).

Pincite

Opinion

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]*444The 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.

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

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]*444The 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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

260 A.D. 443, 23 N.Y.S.2d 116, 1940 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4620, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brown-v-father-divine-nyappdiv-1940.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack