Legal Opinion

Tripp v. Joseph H. Meyer Bros.

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

Decided March 16, 1934PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Per curiam

A judge presiding at a trial has the same power under section 105 of the Civil Practice Act and rule 166 of the Rules of Civil Practice, in a case where no prejudice may result to the opposing party, to grant amendments to pleadings, as a judge at Special Term. (Copeland v. Hugo, 212 App. Div. 229; Feizi v. Second Russian Ins. Co., 199 id. 775.)

In the exercise of such power, the justice presiding at the trial had allowed plaintiff herein, after dismissal of the original complaint, to amend the complaint, and defendant to amend its answer by interposing two affirmative defenses which were…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Conlew, Inc. v. UhlerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1933
  2. Copeland v. HugoAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1925

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Strauss v. Kende Galleries, Inc.New York Supreme Court · 1952

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

Powered by the Exa API