Schleestein v. Cohn

188 A.D. 48, 175 N.Y.S. 890, 1919 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6535

This text of 188 A.D. 48 (Schleestein v. Cohn) 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
Schleestein v. Cohn, 188 A.D. 48, 175 N.Y.S. 890, 1919 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6535 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1919).

Opinion

Per Curiam:

The action is to recover upon two written instruments guaranteeing the payment of two bonds secured by mortgages upon real estate. The fourth defense is that the cause of action is barred by the Statute of Limitations. The fifth [49]*49that the obligation was discharged in bankruptcy proceedings. The determination of either of these defenses in favor of the defendant would terminate the litigation and render a trial upon the merits unnecessary.

Section 973 was added to the Code of Civil Procedure for the purpose of providing for the speedy trial of such pleas in bar. (Smith v. Western Pacific R. Co., 144 App. Div. 180; affd., 203 N. Y. 499; Pemberton v. McAdoo, 149 App. Div. 20; Warner v. Star Co., 162 id. 461; Reich v. Cochran, 171 id. 113.)

The order will, therefore, be reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and the motion granted, with ten dollars costs.

Present — Clarke, P. J., Dowling, Smith, Page and Merrell, JJ.

Order reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion granted, with ten dollars costs.

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

Related

Smith v. Western Pacific Railway Co.
96 N.E. 1106 (New York Court of Appeals, 1911)
Smith v. Western Pacific Railway Co.
144 A.D. 180 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1911)
Pemberton v. McAdoo
149 A.D. 20 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1912)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
188 A.D. 48, 175 N.Y.S. 890, 1919 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6535, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/schleestein-v-cohn-nyappdiv-1919.