L. G. Plumbing, Inc. v. Edelstein

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

L. G. Plumbing, Inc. v. Edelstein

104 A.D.2d 403, 479 N.Y.S.2d 154, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 19863

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedAugust 13, 1984

StatusPublished

This text of 104 A.D.2d 403 (L. G. Plumbing, Inc. v. Edelstein) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

L. G. Plumbing, Inc. v. Edelstein, 104 A.D.2d 403, 479 N.Y.S.2d 154, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 19863 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1984).

Pincite

Opinion

— In an action to recover damages for breach of contract, plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Giaccio, J.), dated October 17, 1983, which denied its motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability, and for an order, inter alia, directing defendants to answer its interrogatories and comply with its demand for a bill of particulars.

Order modified, by deleting therefrom the provision denying that branch of plaintiff’s motion which sought an order, inter alia, directing defendants to answer its interrogatories and to comply with its demand for a bill of particulars, and substituting therefor a provision granting that branch of the motion, to the extent that defendants are directed to serve new answers to the interrogatories and a new bill of particulars. As so modified, order affirmed, without costs or disbursements. Defendants’ time to serve new answers to the interrogatories and a new bill of particulars is extended until 20 days after service upon them of a copy of the order to be made hereon, with notice of entry.

We find that defendants’ responses to the demand for a bill of particulars and to plaintiff’s interrogatories were inadequate. Mollen, P. J., Titone, Lazer and Thompson, 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, plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Giaccio, J.), dated October 17, 1983, which denied its motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability, and for an order, inter alia, directing defendants to answer its interrogatories and comply with its demand for a bill of particulars.

Order modified, by deleting therefrom the provision denying that branch of plaintiff’s motion which sought an order, inter alia, directing defendants to answer its interrogatories and to comply with its demand for a bill of particulars, and substituting therefor a provision granting that branch of the motion, to the extent that defendants are directed to serve new answers to the interrogatories and a new bill of particulars. As so modified, order affirmed, without costs or disbursements. Defendants’ time to serve new answers to the interrogatories and a new bill of particulars is extended until 20 days after service upon them of a copy of the order to be made hereon, with notice of entry.

We find that defendants’ responses to the demand for a bill of particulars and to plaintiff’s interrogatories were inadequate. Mollen, P. J., Titone, Lazer and Thompson, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

104 A.D.2d 403, 479 N.Y.S.2d 154, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 19863, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/l-g-plumbing-inc-v-edelstein-nyappdiv-1984.