Corbett v. Gibson

New York Supreme Court

Corbett v. Gibson

25 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 49

DecidedMay 15, 1879

StatusPublished

This text of 25 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 49 (Corbett v. Gibson) 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

Corbett v. Gibson, 25 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 49 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1879).

Pincite

Opinion

BrKMAN, J.:

The order requiring the disclosure of the residence and address of the plaintiff was made in the reasonable exercise of the discretion and power of the court. The moving affidavit of the defendant disclosed facts tending to show that the action was being prosecuted without the knowledge or desire of the plaintiff, and in that view alone it was proper enough to afford an opportunity for his examination. Besides this, it was the right of the defendant to examine the plaintiff before trial, and to that end to be •informed of his whereabouts.

The order must be affirmed, with costs and disbursements, and it follows that the other order appealed from must take the same • course.

Baekard, P. J., concurred; Gilbert, J., not sitting.

Order directing statement of plaintiff’s residence, etc., affirmed, with costs and disbursements.

Order refusing to set aside order directing statement of plaintiff’s residence, etc., affirmed, with costs and disbursements-

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

BrKMAN, J.:

The order requiring the disclosure of the residence and address of the plaintiff was made in the reasonable exercise of the discretion and power of the court. The moving affidavit of the defendant disclosed facts tending to show that the action was being prosecuted without the knowledge or desire of the plaintiff, and in that view alone it was proper enough to afford an opportunity for his examination. Besides this, it was the right of the defendant to examine the plaintiff before trial, and to that end to be •informed of his whereabouts.

The order must be affirmed, with costs and disbursements, and it follows that the other order appealed from must take the same • course.

Baekard, P. J., concurred; Gilbert, J., not sitting.

Order directing statement of plaintiff’s residence, etc., affirmed, with costs and disbursements.

Order refusing to set aside order directing statement of plaintiff’s residence, etc., affirmed, with costs and disbursements-

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

25 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 49, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/corbett-v-gibson-nysupct-1879.