Dime Savings Bank v. Pine Drive Associates, Inc.
This text of 28 Misc. 2d 648 (Dime Savings Bank v. Pine Drive Associates, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Motion 11 for an order directing the plaintiff to accept the answer of the defendant Preferred Transmix Concrete, Inc.”, is denied.
The movant was served with the summons and complaint on January 9, 1961. The answer was mailed on February 3, 1961, received and returned on February 6. 1961. No affidavit of merits is submitted, nor is any reasonable excuse given for the failure to serve the answer within 20 days after service of the complaint.
[649]*649The observation may be made that the movant, even though it has defaulted in answering in the foreclosure action, is not precluded from proving its lien in a surplus money proceeding (Matter of Lobbett v. Galpin, 228 App. Div. 65; Rules Civ. Prac., rules 262, 263).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
28 Misc. 2d 648, 212 N.Y.S.2d 111, 1961 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 3321, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dime-savings-bank-v-pine-drive-associates-inc-nysupct-1961.