Duffy v. Luther Banks
15 A.D.2d 663, 223 N.Y.S.2d 661, 1962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12082
Opinion
[664] In our opinion, under all the circumstances, the exercise of a sound discretion and the interests of justice require that plaintiffs be allowed to serve the proposed supplemental complaint and bill of particulars upon the conditions stated (cf. Poplar v. Bourjois, Inc., 298 N. Y. 62, 67; Wagner v. Mittendorf, 232 N. Y. 481; Matter of Dickerson v. Essex County, 2 A D 2d 516, 519-520; Brewster v. Brewster Co., 138 App. Div. 139, 140). Beldock, P. J., Ughetta, Kleinfeld, Christ and Brennan, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Duffy v. Luther Banks, 15 A.D.2d 663, 223 N.Y.S.2d 661, 1962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12082 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1962).
15 A.D.2d 663 (Duffy v. Luther Banks) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Poplar v. Bourjois, Inc.
80 N.E.2d 334 (New York Court of Appeals, 1948)
Wagner v. . Mittendorf
134 N.E. 539 (New York Court of Appeals, 1922)
Brewster v. F. G. Brewster Co.
138 A.D. 139 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1910)