Ritter v. Nirenberg
This text of 243 A.D. 542 (Ritter v. Nirenberg) 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.
Opinion
In an action to recover certain stock or its value, order granting defendant’s motion to compel plaintiff to serve an amended complaint, on the ground that causes of action are improperly united, reversed on the law and the facts, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion denied, with ten dollars costs, with leave to defendant to serve an answer within ten days from the entry of the order herein. The two causes of action stated in the complaint involve the same subject-matter, arise out of the same transaction, and seek the same result, to wit, the return of the stock or its value. Although brought on different theories of liability, they are consistent with each other; and it appears on the face of the complaint that they do not require different places of trial. They may, therefore, be joined. (Civ. Prac. Act, § 258; Virdone v. Globe Bank & Trust Co., 235 App. Div. 125.) Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Carswell, Tompkins and Davis, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
243 A.D. 542, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ritter-v-nirenberg-nyappdiv-1934.