Vinbill Corp. v. Morrison

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Vinbill Corp. v. Morrison

19 A.D.2d 659, 241 N.Y.S.2d 519, 1963 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3562

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

DecidedJune 24, 1963

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 19 A.D.2d 659 (Vinbill Corp. v. Morrison) 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

Vinbill Corp. v. Morrison, 19 A.D.2d 659, 241 N.Y.S.2d 519, 1963 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3562 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1963).

Pincite

Opinion

In two actions to recover the balance allegedly due for goods sold and delivered, brought separately by the same plaintiff against each of two corporations having a common principal officer and stockholder, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the County Court, Suffolk County, dated June 14, 1962, which denied its motion to consolidate such actions for joint trial. Order reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and motion for consolidation granted. In our opinion, it was an improvident exercise of discretion to deny consolidation of these actions for trial. So far as appears from the record, both actions involve related transactions; the issues and the witnesses will be the same in both; and we see no material prejudice to the defendants resulting from consolidation. Ughetta, Acting P. J., Kleinfeld, Christ, Brennan and Rabin, JJ., concur.

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

In two actions to recover the balance allegedly due for goods sold and delivered, brought separately by the same plaintiff against each of two corporations having a common principal officer and stockholder, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the County Court, Suffolk County, dated June 14, 1962, which denied its motion to consolidate such actions for joint trial. Order reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and motion for consolidation granted. In our opinion, it was an improvident exercise of discretion to deny consolidation of these actions for trial. So far as appears from the record, both actions involve related transactions; the issues and the witnesses will be the same in both; and we see no material prejudice to the defendants resulting from consolidation. Ughetta, Acting P. J., Kleinfeld, Christ, Brennan and Rabin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

19 A.D.2d 659, 241 N.Y.S.2d 519, 1963 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3562, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/vinbill-corp-v-morrison-nyappdiv-1963.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack