Heisten v. Beech-Nut Packing Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Heisten v. Beech-Nut Packing Co.

249 A.D. 603, 291 N.Y.S. 781, 1936 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5122

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided November 6, 1936·Published

Opinion

— Order unanimously modified by eliminating the provision for examination through Bartlett Arkell, and by striking from the last paragraph of the order the words “ with leave to plaintiff to inspect and make copies or photostats thereof,” and by providing that there may be a limited inspection and use of papers and documents under the rule laid down in Zeltner v. Fidelity & Deposit Co. (220 App. Div. 21), and as so modified affirmed, without costs. The date for the examination to proceed to be fixed in the order. Settle order on notice. Present — Martin, P. J., McAvoy, O’Malley, Townley and Dore, JJ.

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

— Order unanimously modified by eliminating the provision for examination through Bartlett Arkell, and by striking from the last paragraph of the order the words “ with leave to plaintiff to inspect and make copies or photostats thereof,” and by providing that there may be a limited inspection and use of papers and documents under the rule laid down in Zeltner v. Fidelity & Deposit Co. (220 App. Div. 21), and as so modified affirmed, without costs. The date for the examination to proceed to be fixed in the order. Settle order on notice. Present — Martin, P. J., McAvoy, O’Malley, Townley and Dore, JJ.

Heisten v. Beech-Nut Packing Co., 249 A.D. 603, 291 N.Y.S. 781, 1936 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5122 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1936).

Pincite

249 A.D. 603 (Heisten v. Beech-Nut Packing Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related