Fidelity & Casualty Co. v. Seagrist

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Fidelity & Casualty Co. v. Seagrist

80 N.Y.S. 280, 80 A.D. 625

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

DecidedFebruary 6, 1903

StatusPublished

This text of 80 N.Y.S. 280 (Fidelity & Casualty Co. v. Seagrist) 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

Fidelity & Casualty Co. v. Seagrist, 80 N.Y.S. 280, 80 A.D. 625 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1903).

Pincite

Opinion

INGRAHAM, J.

The question upon this appeal is substantially the same as that presented in Casualty Co. v. F. W. Seagrist, Jr., Co. (decided herewith) 80 N. Y. Supp. 277. The only additional fact to which attention should be called is that it is alleged by the defendants that they have dissolved partnership, and that all of their books and papers relating to the copartnership business were turned over to the F. W. Seagrist, Jr., Company more than three years before this application was made. It appears, however, that the corporation succeeded to the business of the copartnership, and that the members of this copartnership are executive officers of the corporation. The defendants do not allege that these books are not under their control, or that there is any real obstacle in the way of their compliance with the order appealed from. We think, however, that the order is too broad, and that it should be modified by requiring the defendants to produce the cashbooks, timebooks, and timesheets used by them during the period covered by the policies of insurance, to wit, from March 21, 1895, to March 21, 1896, and from May 1, 1896, to May 1, 1898, and as modified affirmed, without costs of this appeal. All concur.

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

INGRAHAM, J.

The question upon this appeal is substantially the same as that presented in Casualty Co. v. F. W. Seagrist, Jr., Co. (decided herewith) 80 N. Y. Supp. 277. The only additional fact to which attention should be called is that it is alleged by the defendants that they have dissolved partnership, and that all of their books and papers relating to the copartnership business were turned over to the F. W. Seagrist, Jr., Company more than three years before this application was made. It appears, however, that the corporation succeeded to the business of the copartnership, and that the members of this copartnership are executive officers of the corporation. The defendants do not allege that these books are not under their control, or that there is any real obstacle in the way of their compliance with the order appealed from. We think, however, that the order is too broad, and that it should be modified by requiring the defendants to produce the cashbooks, timebooks, and timesheets used by them during the period covered by the policies of insurance, to wit, from March 21, 1895, to March 21, 1896, and from May 1, 1896, to May 1, 1898, and as modified affirmed, without costs of this appeal. All concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

80 N.Y.S. 280, 80 A.D. 625, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fidelity-casualty-co-v-seagrist-nyappdiv-1903.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack