Reineking v. Embro Realty Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Reineking v. Embro Realty Corp.

250 A.D. 721, 293 N.Y.S. 173, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8611

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

DecidedFebruary 5, 1937

StatusPublished

This text of 250 A.D. 721 (Reineking v. Embro Realty Corp.) 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

Reineking v. Embro Realty Corp., 250 A.D. 721, 293 N.Y.S. 173, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8611 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1937).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to foreclose a mortgage, order striking out the answer as sham and frivolous and granting summary judgment modified by denying the motion for summary judgment as against the appealing defendant, and leaving in the answer the denials therein but striking out the affirmative defense and counterclaim. As so modified, the order is affirmed, without costs. The granting of the motion to strike out the defense and counterclaim does not warrant the granting of summary judgment in plaintiff’s favor. The answer still contains specific denials, and those raise triable issues as to the amount of payments, if any, made on the mortgage to the testator. As to such issues there may be a trial before the court or a referee. Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Davis, Adel and Taylor, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to foreclose a mortgage, order striking out the answer as sham and frivolous and granting summary judgment modified by denying the motion for summary judgment as against the appealing defendant, and leaving in the answer the denials therein but striking out the affirmative defense and counterclaim. As so modified, the order is affirmed, without costs. The granting of the motion to strike out the defense and counterclaim does not warrant the granting of summary judgment in plaintiff’s favor. The answer still contains specific denials, and those raise triable issues as to the amount of payments, if any, made on the mortgage to the testator. As to such issues there may be a trial before the court or a referee. Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Davis, Adel and Taylor, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

250 A.D. 721, 293 N.Y.S. 173, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8611, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/reineking-v-embro-realty-corp-nyappdiv-1937.