Legal Opinion

Mark v. Prentice

New York Supreme Court

Decided October 16, 1959PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMario Pittoni, J.

The plaintiff moves for an order dismissing or striking out the first separate and distinct affirmative defense and counterclaim, and dismissing or striking out the second separate and distinct affirmative defense, setoff and counterclaim.

It appears that the defendant has combined his defenses and counterclaims. This may be done where the facts constitute both a defense and a counterclaim. (Hayden Co. v. Mitchell-Tappen Co., 139 Misc. 480; see Toll v. Friedman, 195 Misc 258 when the facts do not constitute both.)

I

As to the first separate and distinct affirmative defense and counterclaim, it…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Morgan Munitions Supply Co. v. Studebaker Corporation of AmericaNew York Court of Appeals · 1919
  2. Avalon Construction Corp. v. Kirch Holding Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1931
  3. D. H. Hayden Co. v. Mitchell-Tappen Co.New York Supreme Court · 1931
  4. Toll v. FriedmanNew York Supreme Court · 1946

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Wegman v. Dairylea Cooperative, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1975
  2. Colon v. Automatic Retailers Ass'n Service, Inc.Civil Court of the City of New York · 1972

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

Powered by the Exa API