Groff v. Hagan

13 Misc. 322
City of New York Municipal Court·Decided June 15, 1895·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Newburger, J.

Without considering all the questions raised by the appellant, there is one reason why the order appealed from should be reversed.

The affidavit upon which the order is made is by the attorney for the plaintiff.

It has been repeatedly held that an order for a bill of particulars will not be granted on the affidavit of the attorney. Van Olinda v. Hall, 31 N. Y. Supp. 495; Dueber Co. v. Keystone Co., 21 id. 442; Gridley v. Gridley, 7 Civ. Proc. Rep. 215.

The order appealed from must, therefore, be reversed, with costs.

Conlan, J., concurs.

Order reversed, with costs.

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

Groff v. Hagan, 13 Misc. 322 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1895).

13 Misc. 322 (Groff v. Hagan) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Webster v. Fitchburg Railroad
32 Misc. 442 (New York Supreme Court, 1900)
Mori v. Pearsall
14 Misc. 251 (City of New York Municipal Court, 1895)