Rosner v. Globe Valve Corp.

196 Misc. 409, 92 N.Y.S.2d 343, 1949 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2824
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Rosner v. Globe Valve Corp.. Read the opinion of the Court — 193 Misc. 351
New York Supreme Court·Decided October 13, 1949·Published

Opinion

Hofstadter, J.

Motion for judgment on the pleadings sustaining the defenses of the Statute of Limitations as to the first and second counterclaims is denied, without prejudice to renewal in the event that the defendant hereafter is ordered to plead to the defenses and so pleads. The counterclaims are for slander spoken in June, 1947; the counterclaims were first- asserted on July 26, 1948, more than a year later, and hence the plaintiff in his reply pleaded the bar of the one-year Statute of Limitations (Civ. Prac, Act, § 51). The plaintiff has moved for judgment on the pleadings on the defenses so interposed by him. Section 243 of the Civil Practice Act provides that£ 1 * * * An allegation of new matter in the answer to which a reply is not required, or of new matter in a reply is to be deemed controverted by the adverse party, by traverse or avoidance, as the case requires.” The defendant is thus still free, as the pleadings now stand, to establish that the counterclaims have not been outlawed. The motion for judgment on the pleadings must, therefore, be denied (see 3 Carmody on New York Pleading and Practice, § 1066, p. 2343).

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

Rosner v. Globe Valve Corp., 196 Misc. 409, 92 N.Y.S.2d 343, 1949 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2824 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1949).

196 Misc. 409 (Rosner v. Globe Valve Corp.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.