City of New Rochelle v. Seacord
264 A.D. 867, 36 N.Y.S.2d 427, 1942 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5170
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in City of New Rochelle v. Seacord. Read the opinion of the Court — 264 A.D. 882 →
Opinion
Order of the County Court of Westchester County dated March 25, 1942, as amended by order dated April 14, 1942, striking out the defense contained in paragraph “ second ” of defendant’s answer as insufficient in law, affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. (City of Utica v. Proite, 288 N. Y. 477.) Lazansky, P. J., Carswell, Johnston, Taylor and Close, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
City of New Rochelle v. Seacord, 264 A.D. 867, 36 N.Y.S.2d 427, 1942 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5170 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1942).
264 A.D. 867 (City of New Rochelle v. Seacord) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
City of Utica v. Proite
41 N.E.2d 174 (New York Court of Appeals, 1942)