Legal Opinion

I. Berlin & Son, Inc. v. New York City Omnibus Corp.

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Decided May 24, 1939PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Per curiam

As the insufficiency of the defense of another action pending appears upon the face of the answer, the use of the affidavit in aid of same was improper. (Welch v. City of Niagara Falls, 210 App. Div. 170; Reddington v. Elco Merchandising Corp., Inc., 236 App. Div. 64.) That both actions involved the same accident and common questions, may be a ground for consolidation, at least for purposes of trial, but the prior action is not another action pending between the same parties for the same cause. (Tyler v. Standard Wine Co., 52 Misc. 374; affd., 121 App. Div. 928; Tarbell v. Howard, 162 Misc.…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Welch v. City of Niagara FallsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1924
  2. Reddington v. Elco Merchandizing Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1932
  3. Tyler v. Standard Wine Co.New York Supreme Court · 1907
  4. Tarbell v. HowardNew York Supreme Court · 1937

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Kent Development Co. v. LiccioneNew York Court of Appeals · 1975

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

Powered by the Exa API