Legal Opinion

D. H. Hayden Co. v. Mitchell-Tappen Co.

New York Supreme Court

Decided January 8, 1931PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtTownley, J.

Motion by plaintiff, under subdivisions 5 and 6 of rule 109 of the Rules of Civil Practice, to strike out the third, fourth and fifth separate and distinct defenses and counterclaims contained in answer. A defense equivalent to or provable under a general denial is not demurrable and will not be stricken out because the facts alleged therein might be proved under a general denial. (Staten Island Midland R. Co. v. Hinchliffe, 170 N. Y. 473 [1902].) There is no impropriety in combining a defense and a counterclaim where it is claimed that the same facts constitute both. (De Witt v. New York…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Staten Island Midland Railroad v. HinchliffeNew York Court of Appeals · 1902
  2. DeWitt v. New York Herald Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1921

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Capitol Auto Stores, Inc. v. Bradley, New York County Courts1956
  2. Mark v. PrenticeNew York Supreme Court · 1959

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

Powered by the Exa API