Manzo v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Manzo v. City of New York

267 A.D. 899, 48 N.Y.S.2d 322, 1944 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5379

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

DecidedMarch 24, 1944

StatusPublished

This text of 267 A.D. 899 (Manzo v. City of New York) 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

Manzo v. City of New York, 267 A.D. 899, 48 N.Y.S.2d 322, 1944 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5379 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1944).

Pincite

Opinion

By the order appealed from, plaintiffs have been allowed an examination of the Comptroller of the City of New York, the Police Department, the Borough President, including a discovery and inspection of his records, and the Corporation Counsel. Apart from the question of privilege, with the allowance of the examination of the other city officials, the necessity and materiality of the examination of the Corporation Counsel are obviated. Order modified by striking out the provisions relating to discovery and inspection and by striking out that portion of the order which directs an examination of the Corporation Counsel and the production of his books and records, and, as so modified affirmed, without costs. Present — Martin, P. J., Townley, Glennon, Untermyer and Dore, JJ.; Untermyer, J., concurs, except to the extent that the examination of the defendant through its Corporation Counsel is denied, and votes to permit such examination without prejudice to the right of the defendant or its Corporation Counsel to assert any confidential relationship as an objection to any question at the time of the examination. (See Heit & Weisenthal, Inc., v. Licht, 218 App. Div. 753, and cases cited.) Settle order on notice.

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

By the order appealed from, plaintiffs have been allowed an examination of the Comptroller of the City of New York, the Police Department, the Borough President, including a discovery and inspection of his records, and the Corporation Counsel. Apart from the question of privilege, with the allowance of the examination of the other city officials, the necessity and materiality of the examination of the Corporation Counsel are obviated. Order modified by striking out the provisions relating to discovery and inspection and by striking out that portion of the order which directs an examination of the Corporation Counsel and the production of his books and records, and, as so modified affirmed, without costs. Present — Martin, P. J., Townley, Glennon, Untermyer and Dore, JJ.; Untermyer, J., concurs, except to the extent that the examination of the defendant through its Corporation Counsel is denied, and votes to permit such examination without prejudice to the right of the defendant or its Corporation Counsel to assert any confidential relationship as an objection to any question at the time of the examination. (See Heit & Weisenthal, Inc., v. Licht, 218 App. Div. 753, and cases cited.) Settle order on notice.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

267 A.D. 899, 48 N.Y.S.2d 322, 1944 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5379, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/manzo-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-1944.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack