From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Unipak Corp. v. Smith

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 7, 1957
3 A.D.2d 666 (N.Y. App. Div. 1957)

Opinion

January 7, 1957


In an action to recover damages for conversion, the appeal is from an order denying a motion under rule 109 of the Rules of Civil Practice to strike out as insufficient in law the first and second affirmative defenses in the answer. Order modified by striking from the ordering paragraph the word "denied" and by adding thereto a provision that the motion is granted as to the second defense and denied as to the first defense. As so modified, order affirmed, without costs. Both defenses are pleaded as complete defenses. Giving to the pleader the benefit of every favorable inference, the first defense may be deemed sufficient. As to the second defense, however, even if such favorable inferences be drawn, it is still insufficient. The facts pleaded therein neither entitle respondent to hold the property as against the appellant nor justify respondent's resistance to appellant's demand for the property. Nolan, P.J., Wenzel, Beldock, Murphy and Kleinfeld, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Unipak Corp. v. Smith

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 7, 1957
3 A.D.2d 666 (N.Y. App. Div. 1957)
Case details for

Unipak Corp. v. Smith

Case Details

Full title:UNIPAK CORP., Appellant, v. GERALD L. SMITH, Respondent

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

Date published: Jan 7, 1957

Citations

3 A.D.2d 666 (N.Y. App. Div. 1957)