Black v. McAleenan

New York Supreme Court

Black v. McAleenan

29 N.Y.S. 148, 78 Hun 426, 85 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 426, 60 N.Y. St. Rep. 712

DecidedMay 18, 1894

StatusPublished

This text of 29 N.Y.S. 148 (Black v. McAleenan) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Black v. McAleenan, 29 N.Y.S. 148, 78 Hun 426, 85 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 426, 60 N.Y. St. Rep. 712 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1894).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The name, address, business, and financial •standing of the proposed customer are not particulars of the plain[149]*149tiffs’ cause of action, but are merely evidentiary facts, which the plaintiffs should not be required to disclose by a bill of particulars. The plaintiffs’ right of recovery would not be defeated or affected by the fact that Eustis gave the name of some person as a proposed customer who had not in fact proposed to purchase the necklace. The order should be reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and the motion denied, with $10 costs. ■

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

PER CURIAM.

The name, address, business, and financial •standing of the proposed customer are not particulars of the plain[149]*149tiffs’ cause of action, but are merely evidentiary facts, which the plaintiffs should not be required to disclose by a bill of particulars. The plaintiffs’ right of recovery would not be defeated or affected by the fact that Eustis gave the name of some person as a proposed customer who had not in fact proposed to purchase the necklace. The order should be reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and the motion denied, with $10 costs. ■

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

29 N.Y.S. 148, 78 Hun 426, 85 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 426, 60 N.Y. St. Rep. 712, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/black-v-mcaleenan-nysupct-1894.