Legal Opinion
American Capital Corp. v. Duralab Equipment Corp.
Civil Court of the City of New York
Decided August 20, 1963PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtHarry Gittleson, J.
The plaintiff seeks to strike defendant’s answer for failure to appear for examination before trial. The defendant by separate motion prays for dismissal of the complaint pursuant to rule 113 of the Rules of Civil Practice. The latter motion will be considered first.
On August 22, 1960, the defendant instituted an action against Admiral Office and Industrial Equipment Corp. (hereinafter referred to as Admiral) in the former Kings County City Court to recover the sum of $6,000. Admiral interposed an answer which contained a general denial and a counterclaim in the sum of $3,335 allegedly due…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Pepper v. LittonSupreme Court of the United States · 1939
- Local Loan Co. v. HuntSupreme Court of the United States · 1934
- United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. BraySupreme Court of the United States · 1912
- Lesser v. GraySupreme Court of the United States · 1915
- In re Seward Dredging Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1917
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- 64 West Park Avenue Corp. v. Parlong Realty Corp.New York Supreme Court · 1974
- Engelhart v. Kas Carpets, Inc.New York Supreme Court · 1980