From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Szarf v. Blumenfeld

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 24, 1958
5 A.D.2d 887 (N.Y. App. Div. 1958)

Opinion

March 24, 1958


In an action for an accounting, the appeal is from an order granting a motion for leave to serve an amended answer. Order reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and motion denied, without prejudice to a renewal of the motion upon a proper proposed amended answer. The present proposed amended answer is improper in that it pleads the legal effect of foreign statutes rather than their substance. It is also necessary to plead that the foreign statutes were in effect at the time of the alleged transaction, and to negative any exceptions excluded by the foreign statutes from their operation ( Grossman v. Western Fin. Corp., 280 App. Div. 833, and cases cited; 3 Carmody-Wait on New York Practice, pp. 483-493). In view of the particular circumstances existing, appellant shall have the right to take such further procedural steps before trial as he may deem advisable, despite his having filed a statement of readiness. Wenzel, Acting P.J., Beldock, Murphy, Hallinan and Kleinfeld, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Szarf v. Blumenfeld

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 24, 1958
5 A.D.2d 887 (N.Y. App. Div. 1958)
Case details for

Szarf v. Blumenfeld

Case Details

Full title:JUREK SZARF, Individually and as Administrator of the Estate of MIECZYSLAW…

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

Date published: Mar 24, 1958

Citations

5 A.D.2d 887 (N.Y. App. Div. 1958)

Citing Cases

Block v. Fairbairn

The plaintiffs made a request to this court for reconsideration of its decision by opinion mailed December…

Scheinwald v. Scheinwald

Item 2 seeks to find out in whose presence the representations were made. This case presents no special or…