Legal Opinion

Ferrainolo v. Prudential Insurance

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided December 1, 1960PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

Order unanimously modified by striking therefrom the third ordering paragraph and as modified affirmed, with $25 costs and disbursements to the plaintiff-respondent. Memorandum: In our opinion it was *721error to permit the plaintiff to serve a reply to the affirmative defense set forth in the answer. (See Hardecker v. Klem, 249 App. Div. 736; Taubenfeld v. Taubenfeld, 197 Misc. 1072.) (Appeal from order of Monroe Special Term denying defendant’s motion for summary judgment and -granting plaintiff’s cross motion to serve a reply and for a separate trial of the defense of release.) Present —…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Hardecker v. KlemAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1936
  2. Taubenfeld v. TaubenfeldNew York Supreme Court · 1950

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Barrett v. United StatesDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1987

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

Powered by the Exa API