From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Margon Corporation v. Dollac Corporation

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 8, 1957
3 A.D.2d 845 (N.Y. App. Div. 1957)

Opinion

April 8, 1957


In an action, by an employer against a former employee and the corporation he helped to organize, to enjoin the exploitation of trade secrets and for other relief, the answer consists of general denials and an affirmative defense alleging, among other things, that (1) the action was brought in bad faith and for the purpose of furthering respondent's efforts to achieve a monopoly, and (2) appellants themselves had developed the machinery and methods complained of. The appeal is from an order granting a motion, pursuant to subdivision 6 of rule 109 of the Rules of Civil Practice, to strike out the affirmative defense as insufficient in law, with leave to serve an amended answer, if so advised, pleading as an affirmative defense only that appellants developed the machinery and methods herein complained of. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. No opinion. Wenzel, Acting P.J., Murphy, Ughetta, Hallinan and Kleinfeld, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Margon Corporation v. Dollac Corporation

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 8, 1957
3 A.D.2d 845 (N.Y. App. Div. 1957)
Case details for

Margon Corporation v. Dollac Corporation

Case Details

Full title:MARGON CORPORATION, Respondent, v. DOLLAC CORPORATION et al., Appellants

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

Date published: Apr 8, 1957

Citations

3 A.D.2d 845 (N.Y. App. Div. 1957)

Citing Cases

Polychrome Corporation v. Lithotech Corp.

They did not tend to clarify the issues and appellants were not prejudiced by the granting of the motion.…