International Silver Co. v. Mayefski

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

International Silver Co. v. Mayefski

229 A.D. 786

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

DecidedMay 15, 1930

StatusPublished

This text of 229 A.D. 786 (International Silver Co. v. Mayefski) 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

International Silver Co. v. Mayefski, 229 A.D. 786 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1930).

Pincite

Opinion

Order as resettled, dismissing complaint, reversed upon the law. and the facts, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion denied, without costs. The court is of opinion that plaintiff should be given an opportunity to try its case. The reversal is upon condition that plaintiff stipulate within ten days that the dismissal of the counterclaim be vacated and that the counterclaim be tried with the complaint. Should the plaintiff fail so to stipulate the order is affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. Young, Kapper, Carswell and Scudder, JJ., concur; Lazansky, P. J., dissents and votes to affirm, being of opinion that the discretion of the Special Term was fairly exercised and should not, therefore, be disturbed.

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

Order as resettled, dismissing complaint, reversed upon the law. and the facts, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion denied, without costs. The court is of opinion that plaintiff should be given an opportunity to try its case. The reversal is upon condition that plaintiff stipulate within ten days that the dismissal of the counterclaim be vacated and that the counterclaim be tried with the complaint. Should the plaintiff fail so to stipulate the order is affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. Young, Kapper, Carswell and Scudder, JJ., concur; Lazansky, P. J., dissents and votes to affirm, being of opinion that the discretion of the Special Term was fairly exercised and should not, therefore, be disturbed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

229 A.D. 786, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/international-silver-co-v-mayefski-nyappdiv-1930.