Dukes of Dixieland v. Audio Fidelity, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Dukes of Dixieland v. Audio Fidelity, Inc.

19 A.D.2d 615, 242 N.Y.S.2d 703, 1963 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3529

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

DecidedJune 25, 1963

StatusPublished

This text of 19 A.D.2d 615 (Dukes of Dixieland v. Audio Fidelity, Inc.) 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

Dukes of Dixieland v. Audio Fidelity, Inc., 19 A.D.2d 615, 242 N.Y.S.2d 703, 1963 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3529 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1963).

Pincite

Opinion

Orders entered on May 3, 1962, unanimously reversed, on the law, with $20 costs and disbursements to the appellant, and the motions to dismiss the third-party complaint granted, with $10 costs, without prejudice, however, in the exercise of discretion, to the institution of a separate action by respondent (cf. Braun v. City of New York, 17 A D 2d 264; Kratter Gorp. v. Grad, Appeal No. 566, Cal. June 4, 1963). We do not reach or pass upon the merits of respondent’s claim. We hold only that, as pleaded, the third-party complaint fails to meet the basic requirements of section 193-a of the Civil Practice Act. Concur — Botein, P. J., Stevens, Steuer, Bergan and Bastow, JJ.

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

Orders entered on May 3, 1962, unanimously reversed, on the law, with $20 costs and disbursements to the appellant, and the motions to dismiss the third-party complaint granted, with $10 costs, without prejudice, however, in the exercise of discretion, to the institution of a separate action by respondent (cf. Braun v. City of New York, 17 A D 2d 264; Kratter Gorp. v. Grad, Appeal No. 566, Cal. June 4, 1963). We do not reach or pass upon the merits of respondent’s claim. We hold only that, as pleaded, the third-party complaint fails to meet the basic requirements of section 193-a of the Civil Practice Act. Concur — Botein, P. J., Stevens, Steuer, Bergan and Bastow, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

19 A.D.2d 615, 242 N.Y.S.2d 703, 1963 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3529, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dukes-of-dixieland-v-audio-fidelity-inc-nyappdiv-1963.