Alberts v. Remington Rand, Inc.
New York Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtKoch, J.
The authorities relied upon by the plaintiff in support of his contention that the present motion for judgment on the pleadings dismissing the second cause of action is not timely are inapplicable here. They apply only to motions for judgment on the pleadings addressed by a plaintiff to the sufficiency of defenses- and counterclaims. The distinction is pointed out by Mr. Justice Page, writing for the Appellate Division in this department, in Koppel Industrial C. & E. Co. v. Portalis & Co., Ltd. (205 App. Div. 144). The court there held that a motion for judgment on the pleadings dismissing…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Tabor v. . HoffmanNew York Court of Appeals · 1889
- Palmer v. . De WittNew York Court of Appeals · 1872
- Bristol v. Equitable Life Assurance SocietyNew York Court of Appeals · 1892
- New Era Electric Range Co. v. SerrellNew York Court of Appeals · 1929
- Healey v. R. H. Macy & Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1937
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Weitzenkorn v. LesserCalifornia Supreme Court · 1953
- Stanley v. Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1950
- Johnston v. Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1947
- Hamilton Nat. Bank v. BeltCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1953
- Flemming v. Ronson Corp.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1969
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.