Groll v. Stolkin

12 F.R.D. 262, 1951 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4492
CourtDistrict Court, S.D. New York
DecidedJanuary 24, 1951
StatusPublished

This text of 12 F.R.D. 262 (Groll v. Stolkin) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Groll v. Stolkin, 12 F.R.D. 262, 1951 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4492 (S.D.N.Y. 1951).

Opinion

WEINFELD, District Judge.

Plaintiff’s motion to limit the notice for the taking of her deposition to written interrogatories is denied. The nature of the defense and the necessity for confronting and questioning plaintiff with original documents bearing her signature indicate the necessity for oral examination.

If plaintiff prefers not to make the trip to New York for the taking of her deposition, the order to be submitted may contain an alternative provision that the deposition be taken at Los Angeles, California, where she resides, upon condition that the expenses of defendant’s attorney and a reasonable counsel fee in an amount to be fixed by the court be paid.

Settle order on notice.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
12 F.R.D. 262, 1951 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4492, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/groll-v-stolkin-nysd-1951.