Legal Opinion

Ippisch v. Moricz-Smith

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

Decided April 16, 1956PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Appeal, as limited by stipulation of the parties, from so much of an order as denied appellant’s motion, pursuant to section 262 of the Civil Practice Act, to sever the counterclaims pleaded by respondent from the action of the appellant. Order modified by striking from the first ordering paragraph the words “ or in the alternative to sever the counterclaims from the action between the plaintiff and defendant ” and by inserting, after such paragraph, the words “ Ordered, that the said motion to sever the counterclaims from the action between the plaintiff and defendant be and the same hereby…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Sporn v. Hudson Transit LinesAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1942
  2. Ippisch v. Moricz-SmithNew York Supreme Court · 1955
  3. Murphy v. AppelliAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1948
  4. Bata v. National Surety Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1951

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Ghazoul v. International Management Services, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1975
  2. Wehringer v. Standard Security Life InsuranceNew York Court of Appeals · 1982
  3. Mechigian v. Art Capital Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 1985
  4. Bennett v. Town of RiverheadDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1996
  5. Sun Chemical Corp. v. Dainippon Ink & Chemicals, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1986

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

Powered by the Exa API