Kalinowski v. Interstate Motor Freight System
New York Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtA. Franklin Mahoney, J.
Defendant, Carl Gr. G-rimm, seeks an order pursuant to CPLB 3025 (subd. [b]) permitting him to serve an amended answer setting forth a cross complaint against the defendant, Interstate Motor Freight System. The plaintiff did not appear in opposition. Defendant, Interstate, opposes the motion alleging that the lease between the defendants that defendant G-rimm seeks to include in his answer by amendment had expired prior to the date of the happening of the accident alleged in the complaint and, therefore, has nothing to say respecting the rights of the defendants in this lawsuit. The defendant…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Friederang v. Ruth Aldo Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1921
3Cited by2 opinions
- Trump Management Inc. v. TubermanCivil Court of the City of New York · 1995
- Bohack Corp. v. Luigi Goldstein, Inc. (In re Bohack Corp.)District Court, E.D. New York · 1980