Malpass v. Makita Electric Works, Ltd.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Malpass v. Makita Electric Works, Ltd.

202 A.D.2d 482, 610 N.Y.S.2d 794, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2412

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

DecidedMarch 14, 1994

StatusPublished

This text of 202 A.D.2d 482 (Malpass v. Makita Electric Works, Ltd.) 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

Malpass v. Makita Electric Works, Ltd., 202 A.D.2d 482, 610 N.Y.S.2d 794, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2412 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendants appeal from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Wood, J.), entered May 7, 1992, as denied their motion to strike the plaintiffs’ interrogatories in their entirety.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The plaintiffs’ interrogatories, to the extent that they were upheld by the court and temporally limited in scope, are material and necessary to the prosecution of the plaintiffs’ case (see, CPLR 3101; Allen v Crowell-Collier Publ. Co., 21 NY2d 403, 406). Thompson, J. P., Rosenblatt, Ritter, Friedmann and Krausman, 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, etc., the defendants appeal from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Wood, J.), entered May 7, 1992, as denied their motion to strike the plaintiffs’ interrogatories in their entirety.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The plaintiffs’ interrogatories, to the extent that they were upheld by the court and temporally limited in scope, are material and necessary to the prosecution of the plaintiffs’ case (see, CPLR 3101; Allen v Crowell-Collier Publ. Co., 21 NY2d 403, 406). Thompson, J. P., Rosenblatt, Ritter, Friedmann and Krausman, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

202 A.D.2d 482, 610 N.Y.S.2d 794, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2412, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/malpass-v-makita-electric-works-ltd-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack