Lazarus v. Rice
This text of 268 A.D. 985 (Lazarus v. Rice) 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.
Opinion
On a motion for leave to serve an amended complaint the sufficiency of the proposed pleading will not ordinarily be inquired into. (Holgan Bros., Inc., v. Beekman Hospital, 267 App. Div. 815, 816.) It cannot be said on the present record that plaintiff was guilty of loches as a matter of law. Order reversed, with twenty dollars costs and disbursements, and 'the motion granted. Present — Martin, P. J., Townley, Glennon, Cohn and Callahan, JJ.; Glennon and Cohn, JJ., dissent and vote to affirm. Settle order on notice. [See 269 App. Div. 684.]
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
268 A.D. 985, 52 N.Y.S.2d 781, 1944 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4568, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lazarus-v-rice-nyappdiv-1944.