Legal Opinion
Hafnia Ham Co. v. Cheese Importing Co.
New York Supreme Court
Decided May 17, 1955PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJames B. M. McNally, J.
This is a motion by the plaintiff pursuant to rule 103 of the Rules of Civil Practice to strike from the first counterclaim paragraph XXXVIII which incorporates by reference 14 preceding paragraphs of the answer in various, of the defenses on the ground that they are irrelevant, redundant, repetitious, impertinent and prejudicial to the plaintiff.
The counterclaim seeks to recover damages upon a breach of contract in the sale of cheese, and it claims that the defendant suffered damages because of the failure of the seller to comply with the terms of the contract of sale. The various paragraphs…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Gerseta Corp. v. Silk Ass'nAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1927
- Whalen v. StrongAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1930
- Nasmie Construction Co. v. QuasmanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1925
- Savage Realty Co. v. LustAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1922
- Wayte v. Bowker Chemical Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1921
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Merrick v. New York Subways Advertising Co.New York Supreme Court · 1958
- Berkule v. FeldmanNew York Supreme Court · 1963
- Arel, Inc. v. Optics Manufacturing Corp.New York Supreme Court · 1962
- Barish v. CarmelAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1962