Legal Opinion
Pitts v. McGoldrick
New York Supreme Court
Decided March 27, 1951PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtHooley, J.
This is a motion by the plaintiff to strike out the first affirmative defense contained in the answer on the ground that it does not consist of new matter and is insufficient in law upon the face thereof, to strike out the second affirmative defense contained in the said answer on the ground that it is insufficient in law upon the face thereof, and for other relief.
The defendant cross-moves for an order granting judgment on the pleadings in favor of defendant.
It is well settled that a motion to strike out a defense on the ground that it is insufficient in law upon the, face thereof searches…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Yakus v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1944
- Aircraft & Diesel Equipment Corp. v. HirschSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
- Marcus Brown Holding Co. v. FeldmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1921
- Baxter v. . McDonnellNew York Court of Appeals · 1897
- Teeval Co. v. SternNew York Court of Appeals · 1950
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- La Guardia v. CavanaughNew York Court of Appeals · 1981
- Hotel Armstrong, Inc. v. Temporary State Housing Rent CommissionAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1960
- Hotel Armstrong, Inc. v. Temporary State Housing Rent CommissionNew York Supreme Court · 1960