CONSIDINE v. RAWL


39 Misc.2d 1021 (1963)

Agnes Considine, Plaintiff, v. Kathleen B. Rawl, Also Known as Kathleen B. Considine, Defendant.

Supreme Court, Special Term, Kings County.

August 8, 1963


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Frank R. Monaco for plaintiff. Turnbull & Bergh for defendant.


MURRAY T. FEIDEN, J.

The plaintiff moves for an order under rule 103 of the Rules of Civil practice to strike out defendant's answer and all affirmative defenses contained in said answer upon the ground that they are sham, and for an order under rule 109 to dismiss the affirmative defenses upon the ground that said defenses are insufficient in law. The plaintiff's application for an order under rule 113 for...

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