From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Universal Credit Company v. Uggla

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Sep 30, 1936
248 App. Div. 848 (N.Y. App. Div. 1936)

Opinion

September 30, 1936.

Present — Sears, P.J., Taylor, Edgcomb, Crosby and Lewis, JJ. [See ante, p. 529.]


Judgment and order reversed on the law, with costs, and motion denied, without costs. Memorandum: The moving affidavits contain no allegation to the effect that the plaintiff believes there is no defense to the action. While this may be thought to be a somewhat technical objection to the granting of the motion, such an allegation is a requisite prescribed by rule 113 of the Rules of Civil Practice. Its necessity is upheld in First Trust Deposit Co. v. Holt Thomas, Inc. ( 236 App. Div. 714). The remedy of summary judgment is a drastic one, and the requirements of the rule should be strictly complied with in order to entitle the movant to relief. Such being our view we find that it is unnecessary to pass upon the sufficiency of the affidavits in other respects. All concur. (The judgment is entered upon the order striking out the answer of defendant Fish in a replevin action.)


Summaries of

Universal Credit Company v. Uggla

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Sep 30, 1936
248 App. Div. 848 (N.Y. App. Div. 1936)
Case details for

Universal Credit Company v. Uggla

Case Details

Full title:UNIVERSAL CREDIT COMPANY, Respondent, v. RUTH UGGLA, Doing Business under…

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

Date published: Sep 30, 1936

Citations

248 App. Div. 848 (N.Y. App. Div. 1936)

Citing Cases

Pedersen v. J.F. Fitzgerald Construction Company

( Tidewater Oil Sales Corp. v. Pierce, 213 App. Div. 796; Connor v. Commercial Travelers Mut. Acc. Assn. of…

Jenks v. Lowe

Van Wormer v. Two Park Ave. Bldg., 65 N. Y. S. 2d 529, 534, affd. 271 App. Div. 964; Anderson v. New York…