Cwanek v. Kopnak

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Cwanek v. Kopnak

3 A.D.2d 645, 158 N.Y.S.2d 108, 1956 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3478

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

DecidedDecember 20, 1956

StatusPublished

This text of 3 A.D.2d 645 (Cwanek v. Kopnak) 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

Cwanek v. Kopnak, 3 A.D.2d 645, 158 N.Y.S.2d 108, 1956 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3478 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1956).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment and order reversed on the law and facts, with costs, and motion denied with [646]*646$10 costs, without prejudice to such further motions against the answer as the plaintiff may be advised. Memorandum: It is our opinion that rule 104 is not the proper rule under which to move to attack the answer which contains a counterclaim. All concur. (Appeal from judgment of Brie Special Term for plaintiff in an action to recover amount due under construction contract. The order granted plaintiff’s motion to strike out defendants’ answer as frivolous and for judgment for the relief demanded in the complaint.) Present — McCurn, P. J., Vaughan, Kimball, Wheeler and Williams, JJ.

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

Judgment and order reversed on the law and facts, with costs, and motion denied with [646]*646$10 costs, without prejudice to such further motions against the answer as the plaintiff may be advised. Memorandum: It is our opinion that rule 104 is not the proper rule under which to move to attack the answer which contains a counterclaim. All concur. (Appeal from judgment of Brie Special Term for plaintiff in an action to recover amount due under construction contract. The order granted plaintiff’s motion to strike out defendants’ answer as frivolous and for judgment for the relief demanded in the complaint.) Present — McCurn, P. J., Vaughan, Kimball, Wheeler and Williams, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

3 A.D.2d 645, 158 N.Y.S.2d 108, 1956 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3478, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cwanek-v-kopnak-nyappdiv-1956.