Majority
p. 497Alva E. Belmont, Respondent, v. Alfred G. Reeves and Others, Individually and as Copartners, Doing Business under the Firm Name and Style of Reeves, Todd & Swain, Defendants, Impleaded with Alfred G. Reeves and Others, Individually and as Copartners, Doing Business under the Firm Name and Style of Reeves & Todd, Appellants. First Department, June 6, 1924.
Headnote
See headnote in Camp v. Beeves {ante, p. 488).Appeal by the defendants, Alfred G. Reeves and others, from an order of the Supreme Court, made at the New York Special Term and entered in the office of the clerk of the county of New York on the 16th day of November, 1922, denying their motion for judgment dismissing the complaint under subdivisions 5 and 6 of rule 107 of the Rules of Civil Practice after the plaintiff had presented affidavits under rule 108 of the Rules of Civil Practice.
Reeves & Todd [Frederick Collin of counsel], for the appellants.
O’Gorman, Battle & Vandiver [George Gordon Battle of counsel; Vincent H. Rothwell and Harold Harper with him on the brief], for the respondent.
For the reasons indicated in the opinion in the accompanying case of Camp v. Reeves ( 209 App. Div. 488 ), the order appealed from is reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and the motion for judgment dismissing the complaint granted, with ten dollars costs, on the ground that the cause of action set forth therein is barred by the Statute of Limitations.
Clarke, P. J., Finch, McAvoy and Martin, JJ., concur.
Order reversed, with ten dollars' costs and disbursements, and motion granted, with ten dollars costs.