Micromatic Products, Inc. v. Frumit Realty Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Micromatic Products, Inc. v. Frumit Realty Corp.

268 A.D. 972, 52 N.Y.S.2d 575, 1944 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4476

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided December 15, 1944·Published

Opinion

The court at Special Term correctly held that the defense as pleaded was clearly insufficient in laVr. However the defense should also have been stricken out under rule 103 of the Rules of Civil Practice. The court should have considered the affidavits. (Zwerdling v. Bent, 264 App. Div. 195.) Accordingly the order appealed from should be reversed insofar as it denies the motion to dismiss the defense contained in paragraphs 3 to 8 of defendant’s answer, pursuant to rule 103 of the Rules of Civil Practice, and the said motion granted, and, insofar as said order grants the motion to dismiss the defense pursuant to subdivision 6 of rule .109 of the Rules of Civil Practice, it should be affirmed, with twenty dollars costs and disbursements to the plaintiff. Settle order on notice. Present - Martin, P. J., Townley, Glennon, Untermyer and Dore, JJ.

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

The court at Special Term correctly held that the defense as pleaded was clearly insufficient in laVr. However the defense should also have been stricken out under rule 103 of the Rules of Civil Practice. The court should have considered the affidavits. (Zwerdling v. Bent, 264 App. Div. 195.) Accordingly the order appealed from should be reversed insofar as it denies the motion to dismiss the defense contained in paragraphs 3 to 8 of defendant’s answer, pursuant to rule 103 of the Rules of Civil Practice, and the said motion granted, and, insofar as said order grants the motion to dismiss the defense pursuant to subdivision 6 of rule .109 of the Rules of Civil Practice, it should be affirmed, with twenty dollars costs and disbursements to the plaintiff. Settle order on notice. Present - Martin, P. J., Townley, Glennon, Untermyer and Dore, JJ.

Micromatic Products, Inc. v. Frumit Realty Corp., 268 A.D. 972, 52 N.Y.S.2d 575, 1944 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4476 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1944).

Pincite

268 A.D. 972 (Micromatic Products, Inc. v. Frumit Realty Corp.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related