From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Levin v. Shanbron

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 1, 1935
246 App. Div. 783 (N.Y. App. Div. 1935)

Opinion

December, 1935.


Order denying defendant's motion for leave to amend his answer so as to set up the New Jersey Statute of Limitations, reversed upon the law, without costs, and motion granted, without costs, and defendant may serve his amended answer within five days from the entry of the order hereon. While defendant delayed more than three years in making the motion, it affirmatively appears that plaintiffs were not prejudiced by the delay. The only claimed prejudice is that if defendant had pleaded the statute in his original answer, plaintiffs could have discontinued this action and commenced a new action in Pennsylvania, where they resided. This contention is untenable because the Pennsylvania statute, like the New Jersey statute, provides for a two-year limitation as to personal injury actions. Young, Hagarty, Carswell, Davis and Johnston, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Levin v. Shanbron

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 1, 1935
246 App. Div. 783 (N.Y. App. Div. 1935)
Case details for

Levin v. Shanbron

Case Details

Full title:JACK LEVIN and ANNA LEVIN, Respondents, v. AARON SHANBRON, Appellant

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

Date published: Dec 1, 1935

Citations

246 App. Div. 783 (N.Y. App. Div. 1935)

Citing Cases

Everson v. Toia

In this Court's view it did not. By analogy to civil actions it appears that a statute of limitations defense…