Sammatano v. Brooklyn & Queens Transit Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Sammatano v. Brooklyn & Queens Transit Corp.

238 A.D. 809

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided February 15, 1933·No. Appeal No. 2·Published

Opinion

Order striking out the separate defense contained in defendant’s answer reversed on the law, with ten dollars costs and disbursements and motion denied, with ten dollars costs. In the circumstances here shown, the defendant should be permitted to avail itself of the Statute of Limitations as a defense if on the trial it is warranted by the facts disclosed. Lazansky, P. J., Kapper, Carswell, Scudder and Tompkins, JJ., concur.

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

Order striking out the separate defense contained in defendant’s answer reversed on the law, with ten dollars costs and disbursements and motion denied, with ten dollars costs. In the circumstances here shown, the defendant should be permitted to avail itself of the Statute of Limitations as a defense if on the trial it is warranted by the facts disclosed. Lazansky, P. J., Kapper, Carswell, Scudder and Tompkins, JJ., concur.

Sammatano v. Brooklyn & Queens Transit Corp., 238 A.D. 809 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1933).

Pincite

238 A.D. 809 (Sammatano v. Brooklyn & Queens Transit Corp.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.