Home/Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York/McGraw Electric Co. v. Lockyer

McGraw Electric Co. v. Lockyer

267 A.D. 897, 47 N.Y.S.2d 137, 1944 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5376
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMarch 24, 1944
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 267 A.D. 897 (McGraw Electric Co. v. Lockyer) 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
McGraw Electric Co. v. Lockyer, 267 A.D. 897, 47 N.Y.S.2d 137, 1944 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5376 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1944).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The first counterclaim based on alleged breach of contract and the second counterclaim for alleged unfair competition are sufficiently-stated to defeat plaintiffs motion under rule 109 for insufficiency on the face of the pleading.

The third counterclaim for alleged illegal restraint of trade is insufficient. Defendant fails to allege facts showing that plaintiffs claimed action was pursuant to a combination, agreement or arrangement with others constituting an illegal restraint of trade (Locker v. American Tobacco Co., 195 N. Y. 565, 566; General Business Law, § 340).

We think Special Term correctly denied the motion to strike out additional portions of the answer as irrelevant under rule 103.

The order so far as appealed from should be modified accordingly by granting plaintiffs motion to strike out the third counterclaim under rule 109 and as so modified affirmed, without costs, with leave to defendant, if so advised, to replead within ten days after service of the order herein.

Present — 'Martin, P. J., Untermyer, Dore, Cohn and Callahan, JJ.

Order unanimously modified in accordance with opinion and as so modified affirmed, without costs, with leave to the defendant, if so advised, to replead within ten days after service of order to be entered herein. Settle order on notice.

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

Related

People v. B. P. Oil Corp.
80 Misc. 2d 566 (New York Supreme Court, 1976)
State v. Mobil Oil Corp.
45 A.D.2d 701 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1974)
Van Dussen-Storto Motor Inn, Inc. v. Rochester Telephone Corp.
72 Misc. 2d 34 (New York Supreme Court, 1972)
American Cyanamid Co. v. Power Conversion, Inc.
71 Misc. 2d 213 (New York Supreme Court, 1972)
AFA Protective Systems, Inc. v. Crouchley
63 Misc. 2d 695 (New York Supreme Court, 1970)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
267 A.D. 897, 47 N.Y.S.2d 137, 1944 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5376, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcgraw-electric-co-v-lockyer-nyappdiv-1944.