PER CURIAM.
As the insufficiency of the defense of another action pending appears upon the face of the answer, the use of the affidavit in aid of same was improper. ( Welch v. City of Niagara Falls, 210 A.D. 170; Reddington v. Elco Merchandising Corp., Inc., 236 A.D. 64.) That both actions involved the same accident and common questions, may be a ground for consolidation, at least for purposes of trial, but the prior action is not another action pending between the same parties for the same cause. ( Tyler v. Standard Wine Co., 52 Misc. 374; affd., 121 A.D. 928; Tarbell v. Howard, 162 Misc. 606.)
Order reversed, with ten dollars costs, and motion granted.
All concur.
Present — HAMMER, SHIENTAG and NOONAN, JJ.