Legal Opinion

Marinaro v. Pecoraro

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

Decided March 15, 1923No. Appeal No. 2PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

These two actions are both so connected and related to the same subject-matter, to wit, the contract for the purchase and sale of real property, that they may be consolidated without prejudice to any substantial right. The object of section 96 of the Civil Practice Act is to liberalize the practice as much as possible and to remove technical restrictions upon the administration of justice. (Brody v. Madison Lunch, Inc., 199 App. Div. 640; Epstein v. Gluckin, 233 N. Y. 490.) We think these cases fall within the purview of that section. Order reversed on the law, with ten dollars costs and…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Epstein v. . GluckinNew York Court of Appeals · 1922
  2. Brody v. Madison Lunch, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1922

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Krohe v. GoldmanCity of New York Municipal Court · 1938
  2. Langel v. HurwitzNew York Supreme Court · 1926
  3. Water Right & Electrical Co. v. Rockland Light & Power Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1933

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

Powered by the Exa API