Philip Shlansky & Bro. v. Grossman
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Per curiam
The policy of the law is to consolidate actions where it can be done without prejudice to a substantial right (Civ. Prac. Act, § 96). A consolidation in an appropriate case “ is not only a saving in time, trouble, and expense to the parties and the state, but a preventive of the injustice which may result from divergent decisions in each separate case.” (Clark on Code Pleading [2d ed.], p. 493.) ■. Consolidation is particularly appropriate where, as here, both actions clearly arise out of the same series of transactions and the relief sought in one action would constitute an offset to that…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Goldey v. BiermanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1922
- Lee v. SchmeltzerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1930
- Meyer, Connor & Co. v. United Founders Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1933
- Kotler v. KaplanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1927
- Sidney Blumenthal & Co. v. OltarshAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1931
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Bassett v. American Meter Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1964
- Pigott v. FieldAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1960
- Kelly v. John Vogel, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1952
- White v. Boston & Maine RailroadAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1954
- Geller v. TicktinNew York Supreme Court · 1957
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.