Legal Opinion

Jacrov Amusement Co. v. Fischel

New York Supreme Court

Decided April 12, 1928PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMitchell, J.

Plaintiff moves to strike out the counterclaim set up in defendants’ answer against plaintiff and Molly Minsky, the latter of whom defendants seek to join as a party defendant, pursuant to the provisions of section 271 of the Civil Practice Act. I do not think that the defendants, by what they here designate as a counterclaim, raise questions between themselves and the plaintiff “ along with ” the third person sought to be joined as a party defendant. The basis of a counterclaim is a cause of action on the part of a defendant against a plaintiff. No cause of action is here stated by the…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Pollack v. JacksonCity of New York Municipal Court · 1925

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Csicsics v. HallayNew York Supreme Court · 1939
  2. Beaunit Mills, Inc. v. Tanbro Fabrics Corp.New York Supreme Court · 1957
  3. National City Bank v. HolzworthAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1931

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

Powered by the Exa API