Legal Opinion

Standard Accident Insurance v. Marks

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

Decided November 13, 1931PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Per curiam

Our affirmance of the order denying plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment (228 App. Div. 769) is not conclusive of the question here presented. It was a holding merely that the defendant had presented a triable issue. Nor by our affirmance did we adopt the reasoning of Special Term.

In the circumstances we are of opinion that the motion to amend should have been granted.

The order should be reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and the motion granted upon payment of taxable costs to the date of the making of the motion.

Present — Finch, P. J., McAvoy, Martin, O’Malley and…

2Cited by4 opinions

  1. Muramato v. Blidberg Rothchild Co., Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1950
  2. Neivel Realty Corp. v. Prudence Bonds Corp.City of New York Municipal Court · 1934
  3. Del Grosso v. Board of TrusteesNew York Supreme Court · 1982
  4. Segar v. King Features Syndicate, Inc.New York Supreme Court · 1940

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

Powered by the Exa API