Gaydica v. Szemko

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Gaydica v. Szemko

219 A.D. 835

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

DecidedMarch 15, 1927

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 219 A.D. 835 (Gaydica v. Szemko) 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

Gaydica v. Szemko, 219 A.D. 835 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1927).

Pincite

Opinion

Order for examination of defendants before trial affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. We are of opinion that appellants’ criticism of the language of the order where the parties are directed to submit to an examination as to the various subjects stated, viz.: “Whether or not ” the facts are therein set forth, is justified. The examination is not authorized to ascertain whether or not the facts are as stated. The plaintiffs assert that the facts are as alleged in the complaint and moving affidavit. The examination is allowed when it is material and necessary in the prosecution or defense of an action. (Civ. Prac. Act, § 288.) Such examination is not allowed to prove that the facts are “ not ” as alleged by the party seeking it. Kelly, P. J., Manning, Young, Lazansky and Hagarty, JJ., concur.

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

Order for examination of defendants before trial affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. We are of opinion that appellants’ criticism of the language of the order where the parties are directed to submit to an examination as to the various subjects stated, viz.: “Whether or not ” the facts are therein set forth, is justified. The examination is not authorized to ascertain whether or not the facts are as stated. The plaintiffs assert that the facts are as alleged in the complaint and moving affidavit. The examination is allowed when it is material and necessary in the prosecution or defense of an action. (Civ. Prac. Act, § 288.) Such examination is not allowed to prove that the facts are “ not ” as alleged by the party seeking it. Kelly, P. J., Manning, Young, Lazansky and Hagarty, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

219 A.D. 835, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gaydica-v-szemko-nyappdiv-1927.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack