AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges

DIME SAVINGS BANK OF BROOKLYN, Plaintiff, v. PINE DRIVE ASSOCIATES, INC., et al., Defendants

MARIO PITTONI, J.

Motion "for an order directing the plaintiff to accept the answer of the defendant Preferred Transmix Concrete, Inc.", is denied.

The movant was served with the summons and complaint on January 9, 1961. The answer was mailed on February 3, 1961, received and returned on February 6. 1961. No affidavit of merits is submitted, nor is any reasonable excuse given for the failure to serve the answer within 20 days after service of the complaint.

The observation may be made that the movant, even though it has defaulted in answering in the foreclosure action, is not precluded from proving its lien in a surplus money proceeding ( Matter of Lobbett v. Galpin, 228 App. Div. 65; Rules Civ. Prac., rules 262, 263).

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

DIME SAV. BK. OF BROOKLYN v. PINE DRIVE ASSOCIATES
(Feb 27, 1961)