McGee v. Adams Paper & Twine Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

McGee v. Adams Paper & Twine Co.

22 A.D.2d 642, 252 N.Y.S.2d 873, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3156

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

DecidedOctober 1, 1964

StatusPublished

This text of 22 A.D.2d 642 (McGee v. Adams Paper & Twine Co.) 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

McGee v. Adams Paper & Twine Co., 22 A.D.2d 642, 252 N.Y.S.2d 873, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3156 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1964).

Pincite

Opinion

Order entered June 3, 1964, granting the motion of plaintiff Schmid for a further examination of defendants-app ellants, unanimously reversed, on the law, on the facts, and in the exercise of discretion, with $30 costs and disbursements to appellants, and the motion denied, with $10 costs. Defendants had been extensively examined pursuant to an order granted on March 10, 1960. A statement of readiness was thereafter filed and the action placed on the calendar. The motion for a further examination was made practically on the eve of the scheduled trial. Under our decisions in Plantier v. Gould (12 A D 2d 90) and Price v. Brody (7 A D 2d 204) further examinations before trial will not be permitted after the filing of a statement of readiness unless special, unusual or extraordinary circumstances are demonstrated. The record fails to show any such circumstances or any unusual and unanticipated conditions which developed after the ease was noticed for trial in 1962 which warrant the granting of a further examination. It was therefore an improvident exercise of discretion to grant the motion. Concur — Breitel, J. P., Valente, McNally, Eager and Steuer, JJ.

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

Order entered June 3, 1964, granting the motion of plaintiff Schmid for a further examination of defendants-app ellants, unanimously reversed, on the law, on the facts, and in the exercise of discretion, with $30 costs and disbursements to appellants, and the motion denied, with $10 costs. Defendants had been extensively examined pursuant to an order granted on March 10, 1960. A statement of readiness was thereafter filed and the action placed on the calendar. The motion for a further examination was made practically on the eve of the scheduled trial. Under our decisions in Plantier v. Gould (12 A D 2d 90) and Price v. Brody (7 A D 2d 204) further examinations before trial will not be permitted after the filing of a statement of readiness unless special, unusual or extraordinary circumstances are demonstrated. The record fails to show any such circumstances or any unusual and unanticipated conditions which developed after the ease was noticed for trial in 1962 which warrant the granting of a further examination. It was therefore an improvident exercise of discretion to grant the motion. Concur — Breitel, J. P., Valente, McNally, Eager and Steuer, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

22 A.D.2d 642, 252 N.Y.S.2d 873, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3156, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcgee-v-adams-paper-twine-co-nyappdiv-1964.