Laurino v. Pratt

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Laurino v. Pratt

222 A.D. 742

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

DecidedDecember 15, 1927

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 222 A.D. 742 (Laurino v. Pratt) 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

Laurino v. Pratt, 222 A.D. 742 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1927).

Pincite

Opinion

Order modified by allowing an examination of the defendant before trial upon the following matters and issues: 1. That the plaintiff submitted to treatment and operation on her nose by the defendant during the months of March and April, 1925, and the character and details of such treatment and operation. 2. That the plaintiff submitted to further operation and treatment in July, 1925, by the defendant, and the nature and details of such operation and treatment. And as so modified affirmed, without costs. The date for the examination to proceed to be fixed in the order. No opinion. Present — Dowling, P. J., Merrell, Finch, McAvoy and Proskauer, JJ.; Merrell, J., dissents on the authority of Shaw v. Samley Realty Co. (201 App. Div. 433); Schulte v. Petruzzi (153 id. 889); People v. Natural Carbonic Gas Co. (140 id. 802); Tyler v. Twin City Power Co. (179 id. 652). Settle order on notice.

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

Order modified by allowing an examination of the defendant before trial upon the following matters and issues: 1. That the plaintiff submitted to treatment and operation on her nose by the defendant during the months of March and April, 1925, and the character and details of such treatment and operation. 2. That the plaintiff submitted to further operation and treatment in July, 1925, by the defendant, and the nature and details of such operation and treatment. And as so modified affirmed, without costs. The date for the examination to proceed to be fixed in the order. No opinion. Present — Dowling, P. J., Merrell, Finch, McAvoy and Proskauer, JJ.; Merrell, J., dissents on the authority of Shaw v. Samley Realty Co. (201 App. Div. 433); Schulte v. Petruzzi (153 id. 889); People v. Natural Carbonic Gas Co. (140 id. 802); Tyler v. Twin City Power Co. (179 id. 652). Settle order on notice.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

222 A.D. 742, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/laurino-v-pratt-nyappdiv-1927.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack