Marinaro v. Pecoraro

206 A.D. 622
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided March 15, 1923·No. Appeal No. 2·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

These two actions are both so connected and related to the same subject-matter, to wit, the contract for the purchase and sale of real property, that they may be consolidated without prejudice to any substantial right. The object of section 96 of the Civil Practice Act is to liberalize the practice as much as possible and to remove technical restrictions upon the administration of justice. (Brody v. Madison Lunch, Inc., 199 App. Div. 640; Epstein v. Gluckin, 233 N. Y. 490.) We think these cases fall within the purview of that section. Order reversed on the law, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion granted, with ten dollars costs. Kelly, P. J., Rich, Jaycox and Young, JJ., concur.

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

Marinaro v. Pecoraro, 206 A.D. 622 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1923).

206 A.D. 622 (Marinaro v. Pecoraro) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Krohe v. Goldman
167 Misc. 930 (City of New York Municipal Court, 1938)
Water Right & Electrical Co. v. Rockland Light & Power Co.
240 A.D. 1012 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1933)
Langel v. Hurwitz
126 Misc. 463 (New York Supreme Court, 1926)