Ten Eyck v. Columbia Casualty Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Ten Eyck v. Columbia Casualty Co.

246 A.D. 867, 284 N.Y.S. 691

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedJanuary 15, 1936

StatusPublished

This text of 246 A.D. 867 (Ten Eyck v. Columbia Casualty Co.) 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

Ten Eyck v. Columbia Casualty Co., 246 A.D. 867, 284 N.Y.S. 691 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1936).

Pincite

Opinion

This is an appeal from an order which denies the defendants’ motion to strike out the name of one of the parties plaintiff in this action and to strike out certain paragraphs of the complaint as irrelevant and scandalous and tending to prejudice a fair trial of the action. The plaintiffs are the Commissioner of Agriculture and Markets and a milk producer who sues in behalf of himself and about 170 other producers who delivered milk and were underpaid for the same and who allege that through false representations made by the defendants, other than the casualty company, they were induced to release securities and sign releases. The action against the Columbia Casualty Company is upon a bond given to secure the payment of milk under a license issued by the Milk Control Board. Order unanimou ly affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. Present — Hill, P. J., Rhodes, McNamee, Crapser and Heffernan, JJ.

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

This is an appeal from an order which denies the defendants’ motion to strike out the name of one of the parties plaintiff in this action and to strike out certain paragraphs of the complaint as irrelevant and scandalous and tending to prejudice a fair trial of the action. The plaintiffs are the Commissioner of Agriculture and Markets and a milk producer who sues in behalf of himself and about 170 other producers who delivered milk and were underpaid for the same and who allege that through false representations made by the defendants, other than the casualty company, they were induced to release securities and sign releases. The action against the Columbia Casualty Company is upon a bond given to secure the payment of milk under a license issued by the Milk Control Board. Order unanimou ly affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. Present — Hill, P. J., Rhodes, McNamee, Crapser and Heffernan, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

246 A.D. 867, 284 N.Y.S. 691, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ten-eyck-v-columbia-casualty-co-nyappdiv-1936.