History
  • No items yet
midpage
Vitarelli v. Bruson Construction Corp.
235 A.D. 804
N.Y. App. Div.
1932
Check Treatment

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. No judgment was entered, as directed by the order made by Justice Faber, dismissing the complaint in the rescission action. In the absence of such judgment, the complaint may not be dismissed upon motion under rule 107,* on the ground that plaintiff had made an election of remedies prior to the commencement of the present action. It may be doubted if such a motion may in any event be made under the provisions of rule 107. The question in the present case must be raised by answer. (Roberge v. Winne, 144 N. Y. 709, 712.) The appealing defendants may answer within ten days from service of a copy of the order herein. Lazansky, P. J., Young, Kapper, Hagarty and Carswell, JJ., concur.

Case Details

Case Name: Vitarelli v. Bruson Construction Corp.
Court Name: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Date Published: Apr 15, 1932
Citation: 235 A.D. 804
Court Abbreviation: N.Y. App. Div.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.