Lunt v. Two Hundred Forty Goodman Street South, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Lunt v. Two Hundred Forty Goodman Street South, Inc.

232 A.D. 717

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

DecidedJanuary 15, 1931

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 232 A.D. 717 (Lunt v. Two Hundred Forty Goodman Street South, Inc.) 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

Lunt v. Two Hundred Forty Goodman Street South, Inc., 232 A.D. 717 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1931).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Plaintiff is entitled to have an order for the examination of the defendant corporation through its named officers and directors as to some of the matters specified in his notice of motion, since they are material and necessary in the prosecution of his action (Civ. Prac. Act, § 288).

* Plaintiff is also entitled to have the order provide that defendant produce its books and papers, both to refresh the memory of witnesses and for use in evidence (Civ. Prac. Act, § 296).† Assuming that the contract, which is the basis of the action, is presumptively binding upon the defendant — it being signed by defendant’s president ■—and that the contract is, therefore, admissible in evidence and of prima facie value without proof of the authority of the president of defendant to bind the corpora[718]*718tion as signatory, plaintiff is entitled to be prepared before trial to make more than prima facie proof of his cause of action. He has the right to be prepared with all available proof to that end in anticipation of defendant’s furnishing evidence controverting plaintiff’s prima facie case. The order appealed from should be reversed and the motion granted in the respects specified in the order to be entered hereon. All concur. Present —■ Sears, P. J., Crouch, Taylor, Thompson and Crosby, JJ. Order reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements and motion granted in part, without costs.

Amd. by Laws of 1926, chap. 371. See, also, Civ. Prac. Act, § 289.— [Rep,

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

Per Curiam.

Plaintiff is entitled to have an order for the examination of the defendant corporation through its named officers and directors as to some of the matters specified in his notice of motion, since they are material and necessary in the prosecution of his action (Civ. Prac. Act, § 288).

* Plaintiff is also entitled to have the order provide that defendant produce its books and papers, both to refresh the memory of witnesses and for use in evidence (Civ. Prac. Act, § 296).† Assuming that the contract, which is the basis of the action, is presumptively binding upon the defendant — it being signed by defendant’s president ■—and that the contract is, therefore, admissible in evidence and of prima facie value without proof of the authority of the president of defendant to bind the corpora[718]*718tion as signatory, plaintiff is entitled to be prepared before trial to make more than prima facie proof of his cause of action. He has the right to be prepared with all available proof to that end in anticipation of defendant’s furnishing evidence controverting plaintiff’s prima facie case. The order appealed from should be reversed and the motion granted in the respects specified in the order to be entered hereon. All concur. Present —■ Sears, P. J., Crouch, Taylor, Thompson and Crosby, JJ. Order reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements and motion granted in part, without costs.

Amd. by Laws of 1926, chap. 371. See, also, Civ. Prac. Act, § 289.— [Rep,

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

232 A.D. 717, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lunt-v-two-hundred-forty-goodman-street-south-inc-nyappdiv-1931.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack