Flushing Manor, Inc. v. Hotkin
This text of 234 A.D. 716 (Flushing Manor, Inc. v. Hotkin) 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.
Opinion
Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. This [717]*717court has held that under rule 104 of the Rules of Civil Practice, affidavits may be used on a motion to strike out an answer as sham. (Liberty Investing Corp. v. Huntington Investing Corp., 224 App. Div. 867.) Rule 112 of the Rules of Civil Practice is not applicable to the state of facts presented here, and reference thereto in the notice of motion and the order is disregarded as immaterial. Lazansky, P. J., Young, Kapper, Carswell and Davis, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
234 A.D. 716, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/flushing-manor-inc-v-hotkin-nyappdiv-1931.