Mead v. Mead

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Mead v. Mead

263 A.D. 1006, 34 N.Y.S.2d 409, 1942 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7848

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

DecidedMarch 16, 1942

StatusPublished

This text of 263 A.D. 1006 (Mead v. Mead) 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

Mead v. Mead, 263 A.D. 1006, 34 N.Y.S.2d 409, 1942 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7848 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1942).

Pincite

Opinion

Action to restrain defendants from interfering with and trespassing upon plaintiffs’ alleged easements. Order, which among other things denied plaintiffs’ motion to strike the first and third separate defenses from the answer of defendants Mead, modified on the law so as to provide that the motion be granted as to the third defense to the extent of striking paragraph “ Sixteenth ” therefrom. As thus modified, the order, in so far as appealed from, is affirmed, without costs. The first defense, and the third defense with the elimination of paragraph “ Sixteenth,” are sufficient merely as pleaded defenses in view of the failure of the complaint to define the claimed highway area. The " Sixteenth ” paragraph consists of evidentiary matter improperly included in an answer. Lazansky, P. J., Carswell, Johnston, Adel and Close, JJ., concur.

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

Action to restrain defendants from interfering with and trespassing upon plaintiffs’ alleged easements. Order, which among other things denied plaintiffs’ motion to strike the first and third separate defenses from the answer of defendants Mead, modified on the law so as to provide that the motion be granted as to the third defense to the extent of striking paragraph “ Sixteenth ” therefrom. As thus modified, the order, in so far as appealed from, is affirmed, without costs. The first defense, and the third defense with the elimination of paragraph “ Sixteenth,” are sufficient merely as pleaded defenses in view of the failure of the complaint to define the claimed highway area. The " Sixteenth ” paragraph consists of evidentiary matter improperly included in an answer. Lazansky, P. J., Carswell, Johnston, Adel and Close, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

263 A.D. 1006, 34 N.Y.S.2d 409, 1942 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7848, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mead-v-mead-nyappdiv-1942.