Malagoli v. Bernstein

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Malagoli v. Bernstein

1 A.D.2d 1042, 152 N.Y.S.2d 625, 1956 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5179

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

DecidedMay 28, 1956

StatusPublished

This text of 1 A.D.2d 1042 (Malagoli v. Bernstein) 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

Malagoli v. Bernstein, 1 A.D.2d 1042, 152 N.Y.S.2d 625, 1956 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5179 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1956).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries and for medical expenses and loss of services, the appeal is from an order vacating a notice served by the appellants to examine before trial Eileen Connolly as a witness. Order reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements to appellants, and motion denied, without costs. The examination shall proceed on five days’ notice. The witness sought to be examined is the wife of one of the respondents and is likely to be an unfriendly, if not hostile, witness for the appellants. Inasmuch as the respondent Connolly himself has no recollection of the circumstances surrounding the accident, and his wife is apparently able to supply the information sought, special circumstances within the meaning of section 288 of the Civil Practice Act have been made manifest and entitle appellants to take the deposition. (Zirn v. Bradley, 257 App. Div. 832; Heidell v. Murray Co., 255 App. Div. 792; Angell v. Booth, 169 Misc. 735; Price v. Taylor, 140 N. Y. S. 2d 302.) Under the circumstances disclosed, the granting of the motion was an improvident exercise of discretion. Nolan, P. J., Wenzel, Beldock, Murphy and Kleinfeld, 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 personal injuries and for medical expenses and loss of services, the appeal is from an order vacating a notice served by the appellants to examine before trial Eileen Connolly as a witness. Order reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements to appellants, and motion denied, without costs. The examination shall proceed on five days’ notice. The witness sought to be examined is the wife of one of the respondents and is likely to be an unfriendly, if not hostile, witness for the appellants. Inasmuch as the respondent Connolly himself has no recollection of the circumstances surrounding the accident, and his wife is apparently able to supply the information sought, special circumstances within the meaning of section 288 of the Civil Practice Act have been made manifest and entitle appellants to take the deposition. (Zirn v. Bradley, 257 App. Div. 832; Heidell v. Murray Co., 255 App. Div. 792; Angell v. Booth, 169 Misc. 735; Price v. Taylor, 140 N. Y. S. 2d 302.) Under the circumstances disclosed, the granting of the motion was an improvident exercise of discretion. Nolan, P. J., Wenzel, Beldock, Murphy and Kleinfeld, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 A.D.2d 1042, 152 N.Y.S.2d 625, 1956 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5179, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/malagoli-v-bernstein-nyappdiv-1956.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack