Case Name: Albert Reizen, Doing Business as Inter County Painting Company, Respondent, v. Max Pardes, Doing Business as Crown Paint & Wallpaper Company, Defendant; Max Pardes, Doing Business as Crown Paint & Wallpaper Company, Third-Party Plaintiff, v. Isador Nudelman, Doing Business as Liberty Paint Supply Company, Third-Party Defendant; Isador Nudelman, Doing Business at Liberty Paint Supply Company, Third-Party Plaintiff, v. United States Gypsum Company, Third-Party Defendant, Appellant
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Term
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1950-03-23
Citations: 197 Misc. 384
Docket Number: 
Parties: Albert Reizen, Doing Business as Inter County Painting Company, Respondent, v. Max Pardes, Doing Business as Crown Paint & Wallpaper Company, Defendant. Max Pardes, Doing Business as Crown Paint & Wallpaper Company, Third-Party Plaintiff, v. Isador Nudelman, Doing Business as Liberty Paint Supply Company, Third-Party Defendant. * Isador Nudelman, Doing Business at Liberty Paint Supply Company, Third-Party Plaintiff, v. United States Gypsum Company, Third-Party Defendant, Appellant. *
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Miscellaneous Reports
Volume: 197
Pages: 384–384

Head Matter:
Albert Reizen, Doing Business as Inter County Painting Company, Respondent, v. Max Pardes, Doing Business as Crown Paint & Wallpaper Company, Defendant. Max Pardes, Doing Business as Crown Paint & Wallpaper Company, Third-Party Plaintiff, v. Isador Nudelman, Doing Business as Liberty Paint Supply Company, Third-Party Defendant. * Isador Nudelman, Doing Business at Liberty Paint Supply Company, Third-Party Plaintiff, v. United States Gypsum Company, Third-Party Defendant, Appellant. *
Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department,
March 23, 1950.
James Bruce and A. Hayne de Tampert for appellant.
Leon E. Borden and Hyman Stein for respondent.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
The second third-party defendant having raised issues by its denial of the allegations of the main complaint, is, within the purview of section 288 of the Civil Practice Act to be deemed a " party " subject to examination before trial by plaintiff.
The order should be affirmed, with $10 costs.
Steinbrink, Rubenstein and Golden, JJ., concur.
Order affirmed, etc.