Legal Opinion

Newfield v. East River Savings Bank

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

Decided March 27, 1942PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Per curiam

It will require a full development of the facts upon the trial of this action to determine the sufficiency of the defense of the Statute of Limitations. However, it might not be amiss to point out that if the defendant relies upon an election of remedies on the part of the plaintiff, the answer must be amended accordingly. (Roberge v. Winne, 144 N. Y. 709.)

The order should be affirmed, with twenty dollars costs and disbursements. Present — Martin, P. J., O’Malley, Townley, Glennon and Untermyer, JJ.; O’Malley, J., taking no part.

Order unanimously affirmed, with twenty dollars costs and…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Roberge v. WinneNew York Court of Appeals · 1895

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. McCaw v. McCawNew York Supreme Court · 1944
  2. Montes v. Manufacturers Hanover Trust Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1980
  3. Brady v. Rudin Management Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1961

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

Powered by the Exa API