American Condiments Co. v. Audit Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

American Condiments Co. v. Audit Co.

164 A.D. 927

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

DecidedOctober 15, 1914

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 164 A.D. 927 (American Condiments Co. v. Audit Co.) 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

American Condiments Co. v. Audit Co., 164 A.D. 927 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1914).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam:

The defendant is entitled to the particulars demanded in the first six paragraphs of the moving affidavits. It is not an answer to [928]*928this demand that defendant ¡should know as much about the matter complained of as does the plaintiff. The defendant is entitled to be informed what specific facts are claimed by the plaintiff to be covered by the general allegations of the complaint to the end that the issues to be tried may be limited and defined. (Havholm v. Whale Creek Iron Works, 159 App. Div. 578.) The order appealed from should be reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion granted to the extent indicated. Pesent — Ingraham, P. J., McLaughlin, Laughlin, Clarke and Scott, JJ. Order reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion granted to the extent indicated in opinion. Order to be settled on notice.

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

Per Curiam:

The defendant is entitled to the particulars demanded in the first six paragraphs of the moving affidavits. It is not an answer to [928]*928this demand that defendant ¡should know as much about the matter complained of as does the plaintiff. The defendant is entitled to be informed what specific facts are claimed by the plaintiff to be covered by the general allegations of the complaint to the end that the issues to be tried may be limited and defined. (Havholm v. Whale Creek Iron Works, 159 App. Div. 578.) The order appealed from should be reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion granted to the extent indicated. Pesent — Ingraham, P. J., McLaughlin, Laughlin, Clarke and Scott, JJ. Order reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion granted to the extent indicated in opinion. Order to be settled on notice.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

164 A.D. 927, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/american-condiments-co-v-audit-co-nyappdiv-1914.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack