Gray v. Baker

New York Supreme Court

Gray v. Baker

23 N.Y.S. 387, 69 Hun 84, 76 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 84, 52 N.Y. St. Rep. 604

CourtNew York Supreme Court

DecidedMay 8, 1893

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 23 N.Y.S. 387 (Gray v. Baker) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Gray v. Baker, 23 N.Y.S. 387, 69 Hun 84, 76 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 84, 52 N.Y. St. Rep. 604 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1893).

Pincite

Opinion

BARNARD, P. J.

The papers show that the defendants published of and concerning the plaintiff very injurious charges and imputations affecting her character for chastity. The publication is based upon allegations of fact which ought to have been known to the defendants before the publication was made. The defendants seek to examine the plaintiff before answer so as to determine from her examination whether the defendants will be able to answer that the libel published was true. The case of Miller v. Brooks, (Sup.) 20 N. Y. Supp. 359, is a decisive authority against upholding an order for such purpose. The court in that case upheld an order vacating an order for the examination of a plaintiff before answer. The order appealed from should be affirmed, with costs and disbursements.

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

BARNARD, P. J.

The papers show that the defendants published of and concerning the plaintiff very injurious charges and imputations affecting her character for chastity. The publication is based upon allegations of fact which ought to have been known to the defendants before the publication was made. The defendants seek to examine the plaintiff before answer so as to determine from her examination whether the defendants will be able to answer that the libel published was true. The case of Miller v. Brooks, (Sup.) 20 N. Y. Supp. 359, is a decisive authority against upholding an order for such purpose. The court in that case upheld an order vacating an order for the examination of a plaintiff before answer. The order appealed from should be affirmed, with costs and disbursements.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

23 N.Y.S. 387, 69 Hun 84, 76 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 84, 52 N.Y. St. Rep. 604, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gray-v-baker-nysupct-1893.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack