Alter v. O'Hare

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Alter v. O'Hare

54 A.D.2d 888, 388 N.Y.S.2d 14, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14705

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedNovember 1, 1976

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 54 A.D.2d 888 (Alter v. O'Hare) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Alter v. O'Hare, 54 A.D.2d 888, 388 N.Y.S.2d 14, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14705 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for breach of an escrow agreement, defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, dated March 19, 1976, which granted plaintiff’s motion for a protective order vacating defendant’s notice of examination. Order affirmed, with $50 costs and disbursements. There has been no showing of such unusual and unanticipated conditions as would justify relaxation of the rules of this court prohibiting disclosure proceedings after a statement of readiness has been filed (see 22 NYCRR 675.7; Cassidy v Kolonsky, 37 AD2d 880; cf. Calvo v Peros, 49 AD2d 744). Martuscello, Acting P. J., Latham, Cohalan, Margett and Shapiro, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

In an action to recover damages for breach of an escrow agreement, defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, dated March 19, 1976, which granted plaintiff’s motion for a protective order vacating defendant’s notice of examination. Order affirmed, with $50 costs and disbursements. There has been no showing of such unusual and unanticipated conditions as would justify relaxation of the rules of this court prohibiting disclosure proceedings after a statement of readiness has been filed (see 22 NYCRR 675.7; Cassidy v Kolonsky, 37 AD2d 880; cf. Calvo v Peros, 49 AD2d 744). Martuscello, Acting P. J., Latham, Cohalan, Margett and Shapiro, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

54 A.D.2d 888, 388 N.Y.S.2d 14, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14705, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/alter-v-ohare-nyappdiv-1976.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack