From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Friedman v. Universal Mercerizing Company, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 1, 1933
238 App. Div. 805 (N.Y. App. Div. 1933)

Opinion

February, 1933.


Order and judgment of the City Court of White Plains dated July 7, 1932, reversed on the law and the facts, without costs, and motion denied, with ten dollars costs. The scope of the defenses herein is measured by the affidavits. They present questions of fact which may be resolved on a trial only, since they rest upon conflicting oral contentions of the parties. The application to be relieved from failure to comply with section 368 of the Civil Practice Act should be made to the trial court. The defendant is likewise remitted to the trial court for relief with respect to amendment of her answer. Appeal from order denying motion to resettle dismissed. Lazansky, P.J., Kapper, Hagarty, Carswell and Tompkins, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Friedman v. Universal Mercerizing Company, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 1, 1933
238 App. Div. 805 (N.Y. App. Div. 1933)
Case details for

Friedman v. Universal Mercerizing Company, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:HENRY G. FRIEDMAN, Respondent, v. UNIVERSAL MERCERIZING COMPANY, INC.…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Feb 1, 1933

Citations

238 App. Div. 805 (N.Y. App. Div. 1933)

Citing Cases

Airflow Taxi Corporation v. C.I.T. Corporation

Memorandum: Since the affidavits present triable issues of fact, particularly on the question as to whether…