General Aniline & Film Corp. v. Bayer Co.

281 A.D. 668, 117 N.Y.S.2d 497
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedDecember 16, 1952
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 281 A.D. 668 (General Aniline & Film Corp. v. Bayer Co.) 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
General Aniline & Film Corp. v. Bayer Co., 281 A.D. 668, 117 N.Y.S.2d 497 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1952).

Opinions

Memorandum by the Court. The only question before us is whether there is a valid defense pleaded, one which would be a bar to the complaint. Affirmance of the order does not import, as the dissenting opinion suggests, that the consent antitrust decree may not have to be considered in connection with the enforcement of any judgment which plaintiff may recover. It is, however, not a defense to plaintiff’s cause of action for breach of contract. Moreover, defendants may have other remedies to lift themselves from the paradoxical situation in which they find themselves, but a decree to which plaintiff was not a party may not be interposed as a defense.

Order affirmed, with $20 costs and disbursements to the respondent.

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

Related

In re Fidelity National Title Insurance
34 Misc. 3d 508 (New York Supreme Court, 2011)
United States v. Bayer Company
135 F. Supp. 65 (S.D. New York, 1955)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
281 A.D. 668, 117 N.Y.S.2d 497, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/general-aniline-film-corp-v-bayer-co-nyappdiv-1952.