Rotenbach v. Young
New York Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtCropsey, J.
Though the answer denies the material allegations of the complaint, and the reply the material allegations of the counterclaim, it is conceded there is no dispute in the facts. The question is solely one of law. Defendants move for a judgment under rule 113 for the relief demanded in their answer, namely, that the complaint be dismissed and the defendants be adjudged the owners of the property, and upon their counterclaim. The plaintiff although not having given any notice of motion seeks a decision in his favor under rule 112. Summary judgment may be given although a counterclaim be…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Estate of KirkendallWisconsin Supreme Court · 1877
- Gilfether v. SmithCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
- Knowlton v. . AtkinsNew York Court of Appeals · 1892
- Ryan v. AndrewsMichigan Supreme Court · 1870
- Beebee v. . GriffingNew York Court of Appeals · 1856
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- In Re the Estate of LittleWashington Supreme Court · 1986
- Estate of BelshawCalifornia Supreme Court · 1923
- Dell'Osso v. EverettNew York Supreme Court · 1922
- Rotenbach v. YoungAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1923
- Clark v. OxnerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1923
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.