Earle v. Beeman

36 N.Y.S. 833, 72 N.Y. St. Rep. 353
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJanuary 20, 1896
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 36 N.Y.S. 833 (Earle v. Beeman) 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
Earle v. Beeman, 36 N.Y.S. 833, 72 N.Y. St. Rep. 353 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1896).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We do not think the defendant’s petition shows that she cannot properly frame her answer unless she is allowed to inspect the notes mentioned in the plaintiff’s bill of particulars, tihe states in the petition, in substance, that her defense is that she neither made nor authorized the making of the notes sued upon; that she never had their proceeds, or any benefit from them, as charged in the complaint; and that the plaintiff has been paid in real estate and money a large sum upon them. She thus has a clear idea of what her answer ought to contain. We need not consider whether she will, after answer, need an inspection in order to prepare for trial, since her motion is not based upon that ground.

The order is reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and the motion below is denied, with $10 costs.

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

Related

Goldberg v. Malzman
129 N.Y.S. 1124 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1911)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
36 N.Y.S. 833, 72 N.Y. St. Rep. 353, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/earle-v-beeman-nyappdiv-1896.