Breslow v. Finger

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Breslow v. Finger

12 A.D.2d 590, 208 N.Y.S.2d 102, 1960 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6638

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

DecidedDecember 6, 1960

StatusPublished

This text of 12 A.D.2d 590 (Breslow v. Finger) 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

Breslow v. Finger, 12 A.D.2d 590, 208 N.Y.S.2d 102, 1960 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6638 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1960).

Pincite

Opinion

Order entered on June 15, 1960, unanimously modified, on the law and on the facts, to the extent of striking the ease from the calendar and directing plaintiff husband to appear for a general examination before trial pursuant to rule 121-a of the Rules of Civil Practice, with $20 costs and disbursements to appellant. Upon the husband’s action for loss of services and medical expenses he is required to establish the facts proving the liability of the defendant. Therefore, plaintiffs’ counsel was not justified in refusing to permit the husband to be examined as to the facts and circumstances of the accident, and in limiting the examination to loss of services alone. Accordingly, since the examination before trial sought by defendant had not been completed, and since defendant had not been afforded a reasonable opportunity to complete such examination, plaintiffs should not have noticed the lawsuit for trial with a statement of readiness that did not reflect the posture of the ease. Settle order on notice. Concur — Botein, P. J., Breitel, Stevens, Eager and Noonan, JJ.

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

Order entered on June 15, 1960, unanimously modified, on the law and on the facts, to the extent of striking the ease from the calendar and directing plaintiff husband to appear for a general examination before trial pursuant to rule 121-a of the Rules of Civil Practice, with $20 costs and disbursements to appellant. Upon the husband’s action for loss of services and medical expenses he is required to establish the facts proving the liability of the defendant. Therefore, plaintiffs’ counsel was not justified in refusing to permit the husband to be examined as to the facts and circumstances of the accident, and in limiting the examination to loss of services alone. Accordingly, since the examination before trial sought by defendant had not been completed, and since defendant had not been afforded a reasonable opportunity to complete such examination, plaintiffs should not have noticed the lawsuit for trial with a statement of readiness that did not reflect the posture of the ease. Settle order on notice. Concur — Botein, P. J., Breitel, Stevens, Eager and Noonan, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

12 A.D.2d 590, 208 N.Y.S.2d 102, 1960 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6638, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/breslow-v-finger-nyappdiv-1960.