Monick v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Monick v. City of New York

49 A.D.2d 768, 374 N.Y.S.2d 591, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10765

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

DecidedSeptember 29, 1975

StatusPublished

This text of 49 A.D.2d 768 (Monick v. City of New York) 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

Monick v. City of New York, 49 A.D.2d 768, 374 N.Y.S.2d 591, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10765 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

Order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated January 3, 1975, affirmed, without costs. Under all of the circumstances in the record we cannot say that Special Term abused its discretion in granting respondent’s motion for leave to serve an amended answer to plaintiffs complaint setting up the fellow-servant rule as a defense. Hopkins, Acting P. J., Latham, Margett, Brennan and Shapiro, JJ., concur.

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

Order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated January 3, 1975, affirmed, without costs. Under all of the circumstances in the record we cannot say that Special Term abused its discretion in granting respondent’s motion for leave to serve an amended answer to plaintiffs complaint setting up the fellow-servant rule as a defense. Hopkins, Acting P. J., Latham, Margett, Brennan and Shapiro, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

49 A.D.2d 768, 374 N.Y.S.2d 591, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10765, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/monick-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-1975.