Legal Opinion

Levine v. Behn

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

Decided May 19, 1939PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Per curiam

The fifth paragraph of rule 113 of the Rules of Civil Practice merely requires a “ defense ” which is sufficient as *157a matter of law. In the light of the intent and purpose of rule 113 we think this should not be restricted to an affirmative defense only but as applied to that rule embraces matter provable under a general denial if founded upon facts established prima facie by documentary evidence or official record. We find no sound reason for applying a narrow definition of the word “ defense ” to the provisions of a rule of practice remedial in nature and designed to make more efficient the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Morgan Munitions Supply Co. v. Studebaker Corporation of AmericaNew York Court of Appeals · 1919
  2. Lederer v. Wise Shoe Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1938
  3. Staten Island Midland Railroad v. HinchliffeNew York Court of Appeals · 1902
  4. Pross v. Foundation Properties, Inc.New York Supreme Court · 1935
  5. Kelly v. National Bank of WhitehallAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1920

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. In re Residential Capital, LLCUnited States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · 2013
  2. O'Sullivan v. Jarach-Guetta Industrial Overseas Co.New York Supreme Court · 1949
  3. Levine v. BehnNew York Supreme Court · 1940
  4. Gilbert v. Curtiss-Wright Corp.New York Supreme Court · 1942
  5. Grunder v. SchwabNew York Supreme Court · 1943

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API