Jackson v. Mullen

272 A.D.2d 1075

Opinion

In an action for an accounting, specific performance, and for an injunction, order denying defendants’ motion for a bill of particulars, and plaintiffs’ cross motion for examination of defendants before trial and for a discovery and inspection, insofar as appealed from, affirmed, without costs. (Child v. O’Rourke, 122 App. Div. 325; Del Genovese V. Del Genovese, 149 App. Div. 266.) Hagarty, Acting P. J., Carswell and Sneed, JJ., concur; Johnston and Adel, JJ., dissent and vote to reverse the order and to grant the motions, with the following memorandum: Under the facts disclosed by the pleadings, plaintiffs were entitled to an examination before trial and defendants were entitled to a bill of particulars.

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

Jackson v. Mullen, 272 A.D.2d 1075 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1947).

272 A.D.2d 1075 (Jackson v. Mullen) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Child v. O'Rourke
122 A.D. 325 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1907)
Del Genovese v. Del Genovese
149 A.D. 266 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1912)