Lapidus v. Capital Neon Sign Corp.

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Lapidus v. Capital Neon Sign Corp.

170 Misc. 489, 10 N.Y.S.2d 441, 1939 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1585

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedFebruary 10, 1939

StatusPublished

This text of 170 Misc. 489 (Lapidus v. Capital Neon Sign Corp.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Lapidus v. Capital Neon Sign Corp., 170 Misc. 489, 10 N.Y.S.2d 441, 1939 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1585 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1939).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The mere naming of a person as managing agent of a corporation, where the answering affidavit denies control over the person sought to be examined, is insufficient for the granting of an order to examine the named person as such agent.

Judgment and orders reversed, with ten dollars costs, without prejudice to renewal of application for examination of appellant.

All concur. Present — Hammer, Shientag and Noonan, JJ.

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

Per Curiam.

The mere naming of a person as managing agent of a corporation, where the answering affidavit denies control over the person sought to be examined, is insufficient for the granting of an order to examine the named person as such agent.

Judgment and orders reversed, with ten dollars costs, without prejudice to renewal of application for examination of appellant.

All concur. Present — Hammer, Shientag and Noonan, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

170 Misc. 489, 10 N.Y.S.2d 441, 1939 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1585, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lapidus-v-capital-neon-sign-corp-nyappterm-1939.