Jackson v. Redfern Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Jackson v. Redfern Co.

172 A.D. 892

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided December 15, 1915·Published

Opinion

Order in so far as appealed from, reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion in its entirety granted, with ten dollars costs, upon the ground that, according to the well-settled practice as established by many decisions, the defendant is entitled to have a full bill of particulars as asked for in the notice of motion. (See American Woolen Co. of New York v. Altkrug, 137 App. Div. 621; Rhodes v. Adams, 113 id. 304; Dempsey v. Bergen County Traction Co., 74 id. 474; Dwyer v. Slattery, 118 id. 345; Hoareau v. Schwartzkopf, 142 id. 69, 70; Havholm v. Whale Creek Iron Works, 159 id. 578, 582.) Jenks, P. J., Stapleton, Mills, Rich and Putnam, JJ., concurred.

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

Order in so far as appealed from, reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion in its entirety granted, with ten dollars costs, upon the ground that, according to the well-settled practice as established by many decisions, the defendant is entitled to have a full bill of particulars as asked for in the notice of motion. (See American Woolen Co. of New York v. Altkrug, 137 App. Div. 621; Rhodes v. Adams, 113 id. 304; Dempsey v. Bergen County Traction Co., 74 id. 474; Dwyer v. Slattery, 118 id. 345; Hoareau v. Schwartzkopf, 142 id. 69, 70; Havholm v. Whale Creek Iron Works, 159 id. 578, 582.) Jenks, P. J., Stapleton, Mills, Rich and Putnam, JJ., concurred.

Jackson v. Redfern Co., 172 A.D. 892 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1915).

Pincite

172 A.D. 892 (Jackson v. Redfern Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related