Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

150 Misc. 520

Epstein v. Kaplan

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · decided 1934-02-08

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently June 1953

1 state decisions

Relies on Susquehanna Steamship Co. v. A. O. Andersen & Co. · Wilcox v. American Telephone & Telegraph Co. · Jensen v. Barber Steamship Lines

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1934-02-08

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Per Curiam.

¶1Even though this action is one at law, if the plaintiff seeks to escape from the consequences of a release by showing mutual mistake or mistake and fraud, that issue, though equitable in nature, may be determined in the law action. (Wilcox v. American T. & T. Co., 176 N. Y. 115; Warner v. Star Co., 162 App. Div. 458.) It is not necessary first to reform the instrument. (Susquehanna S. S. Co. v. Andersen & Co., 239 N. Y. 285.) The rule is no different in the Municipal Court, since plaintiff does not seek equitable relief, but merely seeks to negative the affirmative defense interposed by the defendant. (Mundler v. Palmer, 165 N. Y. Supp. 987; Jensen v. Barber Steamship Lines, 110 Misc. 632.)

¶2Judgment reversed and new trial ordered, with thirty dollars costs to appellant to abide the event.

¶3All concur; present, Hammer, Callahan and Shientag, JJ.

/150/misc/520 · .json · Public domain