Brooks Bros. v. Tiffany
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Appeal by the defendants, Louis 0. Tiffany and others, as executors, etc., from an' order of the Supreme Court, made at the New York Special Term and entered in the office of -the clerk of the county of New York bn the 27th day of November, 1906, denying the said defendants’ motion for an order compelling the plaintiff to accept service of their amended answer to the amended complaint herein.
1Opinion of the Court
Houghton, J.:
A verified complaint was served to which defendants interposed a verified answer, and within twenty days thereafter served an amended answer. Thereupon the plaintiff served an unverified amended complaint to which the defendants served an unverified answer, and within twenty days thereafter served an unverified amended answer, which latter answer was returned by plaintiff on the ground that its service was unauthorized because the defendants had already served one amended answer and so exhausted their privilege of amendment as of course, and on the further ground that' it was…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- New York Insulated Wire Co. v. Westinghouse Electric & Manuf'g Co.New York Supreme Court · 1895
- Lewis v. PollackAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1903
3Cited by10 opinions
- Stella v. StellaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1983
- Branower & Son, Inc. v. WaldesAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1916
- Bator v. Hungarian Commercial Bank of PestDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1950
- City of Yonkers v. MooreAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1932
- O'Connell v. WilsonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1914
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.