Bloom v. A. R. Nelson Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Bloom v. A. R. Nelson Co.

250 A.D. 866, 297 N.Y.S. 147, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9482

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

DecidedApril 26, 1937

StatusPublished

This text of 250 A.D. 866 (Bloom v. A. R. Nelson 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

Bloom v. A. R. Nelson Co., 250 A.D. 866, 297 N.Y.S. 147, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9482 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1937).

Pincite

Opinion

Order grafting plaintiff’s motion for an examination before trial in an action to recover damages for personal injuries modified by striking out all the items of the subject-matter as to which the witnesses are to be examined, and substituting in place thereof, with respect to the witness Mr. Sutherland, “.As to all the [867]*867circumstances and conversations that occurred between Mr. Sutherland and the plaintiff which led to the plaintiff’s signing of the release, in so far as Mr. Sutherland was acting on behalf of the defendant;” and, with respect to Dr. Archer, “As to all the circumstances and conversations surrounding the physical examination of the plaintiff by Dr. Archer, in so far as the latter was acting on behalf of the defendant,” and as so modified affirmed, without costs; the examination to proceed on five days’ notice. No opinion. Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Carswell, Davis and Close, JJ., concur.

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

Order grafting plaintiff’s motion for an examination before trial in an action to recover damages for personal injuries modified by striking out all the items of the subject-matter as to which the witnesses are to be examined, and substituting in place thereof, with respect to the witness Mr. Sutherland, “.As to all the [867]*867circumstances and conversations that occurred between Mr. Sutherland and the plaintiff which led to the plaintiff’s signing of the release, in so far as Mr. Sutherland was acting on behalf of the defendant;” and, with respect to Dr. Archer, “As to all the circumstances and conversations surrounding the physical examination of the plaintiff by Dr. Archer, in so far as the latter was acting on behalf of the defendant,” and as so modified affirmed, without costs; the examination to proceed on five days’ notice. No opinion. Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Carswell, Davis and Close, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

250 A.D. 866, 297 N.Y.S. 147, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9482, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bloom-v-a-r-nelson-co-nyappdiv-1937.