Garben v. McKittrick

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Garben v. McKittrick

225 A.D. 772

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

DecidedDecember 15, 1928

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 225 A.D. 772 (Garben v. McKittrick) 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

Garben v. McKittrick, 225 A.D. 772 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1928).

Pincite

Opinion

Order granting defendant’s motion to strike out the first separate defense contained in the reply to the counterclaim in defendant’s amended answer reversed upon the law and the facts, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion .denied, with ten dollars costs. The Statute of Limitations was properly pleaded as a defense to the counterclaim, which attempts to set forth a cause of action for malpractice. (Fish v. Conley, 221 App. Div. 609; Black v. Van Aiken, 224 id. 759.) Lazansky, P. J., Rich, Young, Kapper and Hagarty, JJ., concur.

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

Order granting defendant’s motion to strike out the first separate defense contained in the reply to the counterclaim in defendant’s amended answer reversed upon the law and the facts, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion .denied, with ten dollars costs. The Statute of Limitations was properly pleaded as a defense to the counterclaim, which attempts to set forth a cause of action for malpractice. (Fish v. Conley, 221 App. Div. 609; Black v. Van Aiken, 224 id. 759.) Lazansky, P. J., Rich, Young, Kapper and Hagarty, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

225 A.D. 772, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/garben-v-mckittrick-nyappdiv-1928.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack