Freechas Realty Co. v. Hall

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Freechas Realty Co. v. Hall

259 A.D. 1022

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

DecidedJune 10, 1940

DocketAppeal No. 1

StatusPublished

This text of 259 A.D. 1022 (Freechas Realty Co. v. Hall) 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

Freechas Realty Co. v. Hall, 259 A.D. 1022 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1940).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, in so far as appealed from, denying motion of the plaintiff to strike out as insufficient two affirmative defenses contained in the answer, affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. On its face, it appears that the complaint is defective in that a declaratory judgment is sought although the same issue is pending in a proceeding before another court, which presumably has jurisdiction of the subject-matter of the assignment. If for any reason the issue may not or cannot be determined in the Orphans’ Court for the City and County of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, appropriate allegations to that effect should have been set forth affirmatively in the complaint. There are no such allegations. Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Johnston, Taylor and Close, JJ., concur.

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

Order, in so far as appealed from, denying motion of the plaintiff to strike out as insufficient two affirmative defenses contained in the answer, affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. On its face, it appears that the complaint is defective in that a declaratory judgment is sought although the same issue is pending in a proceeding before another court, which presumably has jurisdiction of the subject-matter of the assignment. If for any reason the issue may not or cannot be determined in the Orphans’ Court for the City and County of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, appropriate allegations to that effect should have been set forth affirmatively in the complaint. There are no such allegations. Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Johnston, Taylor and Close, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

259 A.D. 1022, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/freechas-realty-co-v-hall-nyappdiv-1940.