Korobkin v. Chalek

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Korobkin v. Chalek

13 A.D.2d 704, 214 N.Y.S.2d 63, 1961 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11299

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Korobkin v. Chalek. Read the opinion of the Court — 7 A.D.2d 924 →

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided April 24, 1961·Published

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for breach of contract, defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated September 15, 1960, direct[705]*705ing him to file a transcript of parts.of plaintiff’s examination before trial, taken before an Official Referee. Appeal dismissed, without costs. The order is not appealable. The direction to defendant to file the transcript, conceded to be in his possession, does not involve any “part of the merits” or affect “a substantial right” (see Civ. Prac. Act, § 609). Beldoek, Acting P. J., Kleinfeld, Christ, Pette and Brennan, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to recover damages for breach of contract, defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated September 15, 1960, direct[705]*705ing him to file a transcript of parts.of plaintiff’s examination before trial, taken before an Official Referee. Appeal dismissed, without costs. The order is not appealable. The direction to defendant to file the transcript, conceded to be in his possession, does not involve any “part of the merits” or affect “a substantial right” (see Civ. Prac. Act, § 609). Beldoek, Acting P. J., Kleinfeld, Christ, Pette and Brennan, JJ., concur.

Korobkin v. Chalek, 13 A.D.2d 704, 214 N.Y.S.2d 63, 1961 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11299 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1961).

Pincite

13 A.D.2d 704 (Korobkin v. Chalek) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.