Faehndrich v. Wilson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Faehndrich v. Wilson

24 A.D.2d 997, 266 N.Y.S.2d 331, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2811

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

DecidedDecember 13, 1965

StatusPublished

This text of 24 A.D.2d 997 (Faehndrich v. Wilson) 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

Faehndrich v. Wilson, 24 A.D.2d 997, 266 N.Y.S.2d 331, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2811 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover [998]*998damages for wrongful death, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, entered May 4, 1965, which granted plaintiff’s motion for a pretrial examination of certain witnesses and for a discovery and inspection of certain records, reports and memoranda. Order reversed, without costs, and motion denied without prejudice to a new application upon proper papers, if plaintiff be so advised. Plaintiff filed her note of issue and statement of readiness on June 10, 1963. She made no effort to obtain the desired examinations and discovery until March 2, 1965, when she made the present motion. On this record, plaintiff has not shown that the necessity, if amr, for these examinations and discovery resulted from unusual and unanticipated conditions which developed subsequent to the filing of the statement of readiness (see Romito v. Bourjois, Inc., 16 A D 2d 982; Baer v. Oak Vale Estates, 17 A D 2d 826). Beldock, P. J., Christ, Hill, Rabin and Benjamin, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to recover [998]*998damages for wrongful death, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, entered May 4, 1965, which granted plaintiff’s motion for a pretrial examination of certain witnesses and for a discovery and inspection of certain records, reports and memoranda. Order reversed, without costs, and motion denied without prejudice to a new application upon proper papers, if plaintiff be so advised. Plaintiff filed her note of issue and statement of readiness on June 10, 1963. She made no effort to obtain the desired examinations and discovery until March 2, 1965, when she made the present motion. On this record, plaintiff has not shown that the necessity, if amr, for these examinations and discovery resulted from unusual and unanticipated conditions which developed subsequent to the filing of the statement of readiness (see Romito v. Bourjois, Inc., 16 A D 2d 982; Baer v. Oak Vale Estates, 17 A D 2d 826). Beldock, P. J., Christ, Hill, Rabin and Benjamin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

24 A.D.2d 997, 266 N.Y.S.2d 331, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2811, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/faehndrich-v-wilson-nyappdiv-1965.