Legal Opinion

Bomar v. Pasinsky

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided June 10, 1938PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtO’Malley, J.

The plaintiff’s motion to strike out the first and second separate and distinct defenses in the answers of the defendants and the supporting affidavit of her counsel were based on the ground that the defenses were “ insufficient in law.” This was tantamount to a motion addressed to the pleading for insufficiency or a motion made on the pleadings. On such a motion affidavits may not be used, save as specifically authorized by the rules. Rule 110 of the Rules of Civil Practice had no application since that permits the use of affidavits in the case of answer attacked for insufficiency only with…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Fleischer v. TerkerNew York Court of Appeals · 1932
  2. Monica Realty Corp. v. BleeckerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1930

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Puccio v. CarrNew York Supreme Court · 1941
  2. Nelson v. FantinoNew York Supreme Court · 1950

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API