Golditch v. Francis

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Golditch v. Francis

12 A.D.2d 975, 214 N.Y.S.2d 701, 1961 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12575

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

DecidedFebruary 20, 1961

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 12 A.D.2d 975 (Golditch v. Francis) 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

Golditch v. Francis, 12 A.D.2d 975, 214 N.Y.S.2d 701, 1961 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12575 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1961).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by defendant from so much of an order of the County Court, Putnam County, dated November 22, 1960, as denies her cross motion to dismiss plaintiff’s complaint and to strike the action from the Trial Calendar by reason of plaintiff’s refusal to answer any questions upon his examination before trial. Order insofar as appealed from reversed, without costs, cross motion granted, complaint dismissed and action struck from the Trial Calendar, unless plaintiff shall submit to his examination before trial by the defendant pursuant to the notice of examination heretofore served by her upon him; such examination to proceed on 20 days’ written notice given by defendant to plaintiff after the entry of the order hereon, or on any other date mutually fixed by written stipulation of the parties. Defendant was entitled to examine plaintiff in accordance with her notice by reason of plaintiff’s failure to move to vacate or modify the notice (Kohn v. Rockaway Crest Section No. 1, 4 A D 2d 877). Nolan, P. J., Beldock, Ughetta, Christ and Brennan, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by defendant from so much of an order of the County Court, Putnam County, dated November 22, 1960, as denies her cross motion to dismiss plaintiff’s complaint and to strike the action from the Trial Calendar by reason of plaintiff’s refusal to answer any questions upon his examination before trial. Order insofar as appealed from reversed, without costs, cross motion granted, complaint dismissed and action struck from the Trial Calendar, unless plaintiff shall submit to his examination before trial by the defendant pursuant to the notice of examination heretofore served by her upon him; such examination to proceed on 20 days’ written notice given by defendant to plaintiff after the entry of the order hereon, or on any other date mutually fixed by written stipulation of the parties. Defendant was entitled to examine plaintiff in accordance with her notice by reason of plaintiff’s failure to move to vacate or modify the notice (Kohn v. Rockaway Crest Section No. 1, 4 A D 2d 877). Nolan, P. J., Beldock, Ughetta, Christ and Brennan, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

12 A.D.2d 975, 214 N.Y.S.2d 701, 1961 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12575, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/golditch-v-francis-nyappdiv-1961.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack