Kamp v. In Sportswear Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Kamp v. In Sportswear Inc.

39 A.D.2d 869, 332 N.Y.S.2d 983, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4314

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

DecidedJune 13, 1972

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 39 A.D.2d 869 (Kamp v. In Sportswear Inc.) 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

Kamp v. In Sportswear Inc., 39 A.D.2d 869, 332 N.Y.S.2d 983, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4314 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

Order of Appellate Term, First Department, entered on January 31, 1972, affirming an order of the Civil Court, entered on June 21, 1971, granting defendant’s cross motion to dismiss the complaint and denying plaintiff’s motion to preclude the defendant for failure to serve a bill of particulars with reference to affirmative defenses and to strike defendant’s answers for failure to appear at examinations before trial, unanimously reversed, on the law, for the reasons stated in the dissenting opinion of Mr. Justice Lupiano at the Appellate Term. The order of the Civil Court is likewise reversed, on the law, the cross motion denied and the motions in chief remitted to the Civil Court for determination. Appellant shall recover of respondent $50 costs and disbursements of this appeal. Concur — McGivern, J. P. Kupferman, Murphy, McNally and Eager, JJ. [70 Misc 2d 898.]

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

Order of Appellate Term, First Department, entered on January 31, 1972, affirming an order of the Civil Court, entered on June 21, 1971, granting defendant’s cross motion to dismiss the complaint and denying plaintiff’s motion to preclude the defendant for failure to serve a bill of particulars with reference to affirmative defenses and to strike defendant’s answers for failure to appear at examinations before trial, unanimously reversed, on the law, for the reasons stated in the dissenting opinion of Mr. Justice Lupiano at the Appellate Term. The order of the Civil Court is likewise reversed, on the law, the cross motion denied and the motions in chief remitted to the Civil Court for determination. Appellant shall recover of respondent $50 costs and disbursements of this appeal. Concur — McGivern, J. P. Kupferman, Murphy, McNally and Eager, JJ. [70 Misc 2d 898.]

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

39 A.D.2d 869, 332 N.Y.S.2d 983, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4314, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kamp-v-in-sportswear-inc-nyappdiv-1972.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack