Schneidman v. Shapiro

Judgments unanimously reversed upon the law and new trial granted, with thirty dollars costs to appellants to abide the event.

It was error for the trial court to deny plaintiffs’ motion to bring in the third broker. Having granted defendants’ motion to amend their answer by pleading a defect of parties, plaintiffs’ motion to bring in the additional party should have been granted. (Civ. Prac. Act, § 192.) If it were necessary to adjourn the trial, that could have been done in the interest of justice. We think the ’plaintiffs made out a prima facie case. The paper called the receipt…