From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mead v. Mead

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 16, 1942
263 App. Div. 1006 (N.Y. App. Div. 1942)

Opinion

March 16, 1942.


Action to restrain defendants from interfering with and trespassing upon plaintiffs' alleged easements. Order, which among other things denied plaintiffs' motion to strike the first and third separate defenses from the answer of defendants Mead, modified on the law so as to provide that the motion be granted as to the third defense to the extent of striking paragraph "Sixteenth" therefrom. As thus modified, the order, in so far as appealed from, is affirmed, without costs. The first defense, and the third defense with the elimination of paragraph "Sixteenth," are sufficient merely as pleaded defenses in view of the failure of the complaint to define the claimed highway area. The "Sixteenth" paragraph consists of evidentiary matter improperly included in an answer. Lazansky, P.J., Carswell, Johnston, Adel and Close, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Mead v. Mead

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 16, 1942
263 App. Div. 1006 (N.Y. App. Div. 1942)
Case details for

Mead v. Mead

Case Details

Full title:JOHN J.S. MEAD, Supervisor of the Town of Lewisboro, and MARTIN T. SILKMAN…

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

Date published: Mar 16, 1942

Citations

263 App. Div. 1006 (N.Y. App. Div. 1942)