Lockwood v. Sello

City of New York Municipal Court

Lockwood v. Sello

57 N.Y.S. 816

City of New York Municipal Court·Decided April 27, 1899·Published

Opinion

CORLAN, J.

Appeal from an order denying a motion to vacate an order for the examination of third parties in supplementary proceedings. The affidavit is on information and belief, and the affiant’s source of information does not satisfy us that the order should stand. The relation of his informant to the third parties is not given, except that he was a representative; but in what capacity is not shown, nor does his conversation with the plaintiff strengthen the affidavit. We think it falls within the ruling in Pierce v. Parrish, 28 App. Div. 22, 50 N. Y. Supp. 735, and In re Leslie, 19 Misc. Rep. 670, 44 N. Y, Supp. 1103, and must therefore be reversed.

Order appealed from reversed, with costs. All concur.

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

CORLAN, J.

Appeal from an order denying a motion to vacate an order for the examination of third parties in supplementary proceedings. The affidavit is on information and belief, and the affiant’s source of information does not satisfy us that the order should stand. The relation of his informant to the third parties is not given, except that he was a representative; but in what capacity is not shown, nor does his conversation with the plaintiff strengthen the affidavit. We think it falls within the ruling in Pierce v. Parrish, 28 App. Div. 22, 50 N. Y. Supp. 735, and In re Leslie, 19 Misc. Rep. 670, 44 N. Y, Supp. 1103, and must therefore be reversed.

Order appealed from reversed, with costs. All concur.

Lockwood v. Sello, 57 N.Y.S. 816 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1899).

Pincite

57 N.Y.S. 816 (Lockwood v. Sello) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related