Legal Opinion
Ac-tin-o-lyte Roofing Co. v. Werner
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided May 16, 1924PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Martin, J.:
We find it necessary to consider but one of the two grounds of appeal.
The plaintiff recovered a judgment against the defendants for the sum of $207.10, the complaint having set forth a claim for $163.51, as the amount remaining due for work, labor and services. The answer sets up a counterclaim on its face in favor of one of the two defendants, upon a cause of action arising out of the same transaction. Defendants having succeeded in partly establishing the counterclaim, materially decreased the recovery. Plaintiff is a foreign corporation which has not complied with the…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Wood Selick v. . BallNew York Court of Appeals · 1907
- Mahar v. . Harrington Park Villa SitesNew York Court of Appeals · 1912
- Eclipse Silk Manufacturing Co. v. HillerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1911
- American Can Co. v. Grassi Contracting Co.Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1918
- Wood & Selick v. BallAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1906
3Cited by3 opinions
- Yager v. YagerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1925
- Western Felt Works v. Modern Carpet Cleaning & Storage Corp.City of New York Municipal Court · 1931
- Paper Manufacturers Co. v. Ris Paper Co.Civil Court of the City of New York · 1976