1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. Misc.
  4. 199 Misc.
  5. 199 Misc. 1025 (1951)
 

LEBRECHT v. OREFICE

199 Misc. 1025 (1951)

Willy A. Lebrecht et al., Individually and as Copartners Doing Business under the Name of Handi-Blott Co., Appellants, v. John R. Orefice, Respondent.

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department.

May 10, 1951.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Robert L. Boehm for appellants.

Lester H. Sisskin and Frances Cymberg for respondent.

EDER, J., concurs with SCHREIBER, J.; HAMMER, J., dissents in in opinion.

SCHREIBER, J.

The purpose of the repeal in 1936 of former section 266 of the Civil Practice Act and its replacement with the present section 266 (L. 1936, ch. 324) was to encourage the disposition in one action of all claims between the parties thereto. To hold that the interposition of a counterclaim is not the commencement of an action within the meaning of section 23 of the Civil Practice Act would tend to...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases