Legal Opinion

High Rock Knitting Co. v. Bronner

New York Supreme Court

Decided December 15, 1896PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Motion by. defendants to vacate and set aside, a judgment in* favor of plaintiff as irregularly taken and entered.

1Opinion of the CourtHiscock, J.

The judgment complained of was entered as upon, a default and this default was based upon a return of defendant’s answer otherwise served in time upon the ground that it was not verified. Its lack of a verification is not disputed, but it is insisted by defendants that it "was proper for them to serve an unverified answer because the purported verification of the complaint was defective, and, therefore, null. It is also urged that plaintiff’s attorney did not return the answer with due diligence, assuming that it Was defective in point of verification.-

*628Upon all of the affidavits submitted I…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Duryea, Watts & Co. v. RaynerNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1895
  2. Smith v. RosenthallNew York Supreme Court · 1855
  3. Myers v. GerritsNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1861

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. H. G. Bittleston Law & Collection Agency v. HowardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
  2. Climax Specialty Co. v. Benjamin C. Smith & SonsAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1900
  3. Universal C. I. T. Credit Corp. v. MurphyNew York Supreme Court · 1962

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

Powered by the Exa API