In re Van Nostrand

New York Supreme Court

In re Van Nostrand

29 N.Y.S. 112, 78 Hun 351, 85 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 351, 60 N.Y. St. Rep. 725

CourtNew York Supreme Court

DecidedMay 18, 1894

StatusPublished

Cited by9 cases

This text of 29 N.Y.S. 112 (In re Van Nostrand) 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

In re Van Nostrand, 29 N.Y.S. 112, 78 Hun 351, 85 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 351, 60 N.Y. St. Rep. 725 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1894).

Pincite

Opinion

PARKER, J.

The affidavit upon which the order is based, authorizing the examination of Van Nostrand for the alleged purpose of enabling the affiant to prepare his complaint in an action to be brought by him, is fatally defective, in that it fails to support the allegations made upon information and belief by the affidavit ■of deponent’s informant, or by assigning a reason for not producing such affidavit, and presenting, instead, the statements made by him to the affiant. From the affidavit it appears that the information which persuaded the affiant to make it was obtained from •one MacDonald, and an alleged copy of an agreement. The so-called “agreement” does not justify the belief expressed, and the remaining source of information is therefore MacDonald’s statement to him. But he has failed to furnish to the court any part •of the conversation with MacDonald. Whether MacDonald said anything to justify the impression made upon the affiant’s mind, the court cannot know; and the authority to inquire into the private affairs of an alleged interested party to an action will not be granted by it until it has such knowledge of the facts as persuades it that the examination is desired solely for the purposes authorized by the Code. The order should be reversed, with $10 ■costs and printing disbursements, ■ and motion granted, with $10 ■costs. All concur.

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

PARKER, J.

The affidavit upon which the order is based, authorizing the examination of Van Nostrand for the alleged purpose of enabling the affiant to prepare his complaint in an action to be brought by him, is fatally defective, in that it fails to support the allegations made upon information and belief by the affidavit ■of deponent’s informant, or by assigning a reason for not producing such affidavit, and presenting, instead, the statements made by him to the affiant. From the affidavit it appears that the information which persuaded the affiant to make it was obtained from •one MacDonald, and an alleged copy of an agreement. The so-called “agreement” does not justify the belief expressed, and the remaining source of information is therefore MacDonald’s statement to him. But he has failed to furnish to the court any part •of the conversation with MacDonald. Whether MacDonald said anything to justify the impression made upon the affiant’s mind, the court cannot know; and the authority to inquire into the private affairs of an alleged interested party to an action will not be granted by it until it has such knowledge of the facts as persuades it that the examination is desired solely for the purposes authorized by the Code. The order should be reversed, with $10 ■costs and printing disbursements, ■ and motion granted, with $10 ■costs. All concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

29 N.Y.S. 112, 78 Hun 351, 85 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 351, 60 N.Y. St. Rep. 725, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-van-nostrand-nysupct-1894.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack