Dennis v. Stock, Grain & Provision Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Dennis v. Stock, Grain & Provision Co.

144 A.D. 585, 129 N.Y.S. 760, 1911 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4195

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

DecidedMay 19, 1911

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 144 A.D. 585 (Dennis v. Stock, Grain & Provision 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

Dennis v. Stock, Grain & Provision Co., 144 A.D. 585, 129 N.Y.S. 760, 1911 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4195 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1911).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam:

Appeal from order vacating order of examination of defendant by two of its officers.

The order for examination was made on October 20, 1910, and was served on defendant, but it was found impossible to procure the attendance of the officers to be examined because. plaintiff did not know where to find them. Defendant’s attorneys declined to accept service on behalf of said officers, or to produce them for examination, or to disclose their addresses, except to say that one of them was in Plainfield, N. J.. Under these circumstances an order was made staying all proceedings on the part of defendant pending the production and examination of said officers. This order was made on notice and was in full force and effect when the motion to vacate the order of examination was made. That motion was certainly a proceeding in the action, and as such was forbidden to be taken.. On this ground alone, without considering any other question (upon which we express no opinion), thé motion to vacate should not have been entertained. ■ .

The order appealed from should be reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and the motion denied, with ten dollars costs.

Present—Ingraham, P. J., Olarke, Scott, Miller and Dowling, JJ.

Order reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion denied, with ten dollars costs.

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

Per Curiam:

Appeal from order vacating order of examination of defendant by two of its officers.

The order for examination was made on October 20, 1910, and was served on defendant, but it was found impossible to procure the attendance of the officers to be examined because. plaintiff did not know where to find them. Defendant’s attorneys declined to accept service on behalf of said officers, or to produce them for examination, or to disclose their addresses, except to say that one of them was in Plainfield, N. J.. Under these circumstances an order was made staying all proceedings on the part of defendant pending the production and examination of said officers. This order was made on notice and was in full force and effect when the motion to vacate the order of examination was made. That motion was certainly a proceeding in the action, and as such was forbidden to be taken.. On this ground alone, without considering any other question (upon which we express no opinion), thé motion to vacate should not have been entertained. ■ .

The order appealed from should be reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and the motion denied, with ten dollars costs.

Present—Ingraham, P. J., Olarke, Scott, Miller and Dowling, JJ.

Order reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion denied, with ten dollars costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

144 A.D. 585, 129 N.Y.S. 760, 1911 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4195, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dennis-v-stock-grain-provision-co-nyappdiv-1911.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack