Baer v. Oak Vale Estates, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Baer v. Oak Vale Estates, Inc.

17 A.D.2d 826, 1962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7823

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

DecidedOctober 9, 1962

StatusPublished

This text of 17 A.D.2d 826 (Baer v. Oak Vale Estates, Inc.) 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

Baer v. Oak Vale Estates, Inc., 17 A.D.2d 826, 1962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7823 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1962).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, medical expenses and loss of services sustained when the female plaintiff fell while inspecting defendant’s model home, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated April 25, 1962, which granted plaintiffs’ motion to examine defendant before trial and directed it to produce certain books and records pursuant to section 296 of the Civil Practice Act. Order reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and motion denied. Plaintiffs filed their note of issue and statement of readiness on April 28, 1958. No effort to examine defendant was made until plaintiffs retained new counsel on March 7,1962. Such counsel, by notice of motion dated April 4, 1962, moved for the order under review. We note that plaintiffs’ former counsel was disbarred by order of this court in 1961. In our opinion, the record does not justify the conclusion that the necessity, if any, for an examination before trial, resulted from unusual and unanticipated conditions which developed subsequent to the filing of the statement of readiness (Special Rules, Appellate Division — Second Department, Special Readiness Rule, subd. 7; cf. Romito v. Bourjois, Inc., 16 A D 2d 982). Beldock, P. J., Ughetta, Christ, Brennan and Hopkins, 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 personal injuries, medical expenses and loss of services sustained when the female plaintiff fell while inspecting defendant’s model home, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated April 25, 1962, which granted plaintiffs’ motion to examine defendant before trial and directed it to produce certain books and records pursuant to section 296 of the Civil Practice Act. Order reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and motion denied. Plaintiffs filed their note of issue and statement of readiness on April 28, 1958. No effort to examine defendant was made until plaintiffs retained new counsel on March 7,1962. Such counsel, by notice of motion dated April 4, 1962, moved for the order under review. We note that plaintiffs’ former counsel was disbarred by order of this court in 1961. In our opinion, the record does not justify the conclusion that the necessity, if any, for an examination before trial, resulted from unusual and unanticipated conditions which developed subsequent to the filing of the statement of readiness (Special Rules, Appellate Division — Second Department, Special Readiness Rule, subd. 7; cf. Romito v. Bourjois, Inc., 16 A D 2d 982). Beldock, P. J., Ughetta, Christ, Brennan and Hopkins, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

17 A.D.2d 826, 1962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7823, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/baer-v-oak-vale-estates-inc-nyappdiv-1962.