de Oteris v. Mario

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

de Oteris v. Mario

270 A.D. 820, 60 N.Y.S.2d 297, 1946 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4103

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

DecidedFebruary 18, 1946

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 270 A.D. 820 (de Oteris v. Mario) 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

de Oteris v. Mario, 270 A.D. 820, 60 N.Y.S.2d 297, 1946 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4103 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1946).

Pincite

Opinion

The complaint contains two causes of action, one for absolute divorce and the other to set aside a separation agreement. Defendant moved for an order (a) severing the causes of action and directing the service of an amended complaint; (b) in the alternative, dismissing the second cause of action because of improper joinder with the first cause of action; (e) in the alternative, directing plaintiff to separately state and number the several causes of action alleged in the second cause of action; (d) in the alternative, striking out paragraphs “Ninth” to “ Twelfth ”, inclusive, under rules 102 and 103 of the Rules of Civil Practice. The motion was denied without prejudice to defendant’s right to move for separate trials of the issues involved. Defendant appeals. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursments. No opinion. Lewis, P. J., Hagarty, Carswell, Johnston and Nolán, JJ., concur. [185 Misc. 1029.]

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

The complaint contains two causes of action, one for absolute divorce and the other to set aside a separation agreement. Defendant moved for an order (a) severing the causes of action and directing the service of an amended complaint; (b) in the alternative, dismissing the second cause of action because of improper joinder with the first cause of action; (e) in the alternative, directing plaintiff to separately state and number the several causes of action alleged in the second cause of action; (d) in the alternative, striking out paragraphs “Ninth” to “ Twelfth ”, inclusive, under rules 102 and 103 of the Rules of Civil Practice. The motion was denied without prejudice to defendant’s right to move for separate trials of the issues involved. Defendant appeals. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursments. No opinion. Lewis, P. J., Hagarty, Carswell, Johnston and Nolán, JJ., concur. [185 Misc. 1029.]

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

270 A.D. 820, 60 N.Y.S.2d 297, 1946 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4103, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/de-oteris-v-mario-nyappdiv-1946.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack