Gack v. R. H. Macy & Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Gack v. R. H. Macy & Co.

281 A.D. 818, 118 N.Y.S.2d 918, 1953 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3421

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

DecidedFebruary 17, 1953

StatusPublished

This text of 281 A.D. 818 (Gack v. R. H. Macy & 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

Gack v. R. H. Macy & Co., 281 A.D. 818, 118 N.Y.S.2d 918, 1953 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3421 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1953).

Pincite

Opinion

In this case plaintiff alleged and defendant denied making of the warranties relied on and examination should have been permitted on the issues thus raised. Rule X of the New York County Trial Term Rules was intended to enlarge rather than limit the scope of examinations before trial where the right to such had previously been denied. It was not designed to reduce or diminish the area of prior permissible inquiry. Order unanimously modified so as to grant, in addition to the items allowed, all items requested in the notice of examination, except item 8, and, as so modified, affirmed, with $20 costs and disbursements to the appellants. The date for the examination to proceed shall be fixed in the order. Settle order on notice. Present — Dore, J. P., Cohn, Van Voorhis and Breitel, JJ.

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

In this case plaintiff alleged and defendant denied making of the warranties relied on and examination should have been permitted on the issues thus raised. Rule X of the New York County Trial Term Rules was intended to enlarge rather than limit the scope of examinations before trial where the right to such had previously been denied. It was not designed to reduce or diminish the area of prior permissible inquiry. Order unanimously modified so as to grant, in addition to the items allowed, all items requested in the notice of examination, except item 8, and, as so modified, affirmed, with $20 costs and disbursements to the appellants. The date for the examination to proceed shall be fixed in the order. Settle order on notice. Present — Dore, J. P., Cohn, Van Voorhis and Breitel, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

281 A.D. 818, 118 N.Y.S.2d 918, 1953 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3421, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gack-v-r-h-macy-co-nyappdiv-1953.