Standard Accident Insurance v. Marks

233 A.D. 466, 253 N.Y.S. 342, 1931 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11331
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided November 13, 1931·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Our affirmance of the order denying plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment (228 App. Div. 769) is not conclusive of the question here presented. It was a holding merely that the defendant had presented a triable issue. Nor by our affirmance did we adopt the reasoning of Special Term.

In the circumstances we are of opinion that the motion to amend should have been granted.

The order should be reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and the motion granted upon payment of taxable costs to the date of the making of the motion.

Present — Finch, P. J., McAvoy, Martin, O’Malley and Townley, JJ.

Order reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion granted on payment of taxable costs to date of the making of the motion.

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

Standard Accident Insurance v. Marks, 233 A.D. 466, 253 N.Y.S. 342, 1931 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11331 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1931).

233 A.D. 466 (Standard Accident Insurance v. Marks) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Del Grosso v. Board of Trustees
113 Misc. 2d 440 (New York Supreme Court, 1982)
Muramato v. Blidberg Rothchild Co., Inc.
94 F. Supp. 131 (S.D. New York, 1950)
Segar v. King Features Syndicate, Inc.
175 Misc. 25 (New York Supreme Court, 1940)
Neivel Realty Corp. v. Prudence Bonds Corp.
151 Misc. 737 (City of New York Municipal Court, 1934)