Meyer v. Doyle

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Meyer v. Doyle

255 A.D. 930, 8 N.Y.S.2d 795, 1938 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5881

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

DecidedNovember 16, 1938

StatusPublished

This text of 255 A.D. 930 (Meyer v. Doyle) 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

Meyer v. Doyle, 255 A.D. 930, 8 N.Y.S.2d 795, 1938 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5881 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1938).

Pincite

Opinion

Order modified by striking therefrom the second ordering paragraph thereof and as modified affirmed, without costs of this appeal to either party. Memorandum: The record shows that plaintiff has been furnished with a photostatic copy of the release, which is pleaded as a defense in defendants’ answer and as to which defendants have the burden of proof. Under these circumstances we conclude that an examination before trial in relation to the release pleaded in defendants’ answer would not involve testimony which is material and necessary to the prosecution of plaintiff’s action within section 288 of the Civil Practice Act. All concur. (The order grants plaintiff’s motion to examine defendants before trial.) Present • — • Sears, P. J., Crosby, Lewis, Cunningham and Dowling, JJ.

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

Order modified by striking therefrom the second ordering paragraph thereof and as modified affirmed, without costs of this appeal to either party. Memorandum: The record shows that plaintiff has been furnished with a photostatic copy of the release, which is pleaded as a defense in defendants’ answer and as to which defendants have the burden of proof. Under these circumstances we conclude that an examination before trial in relation to the release pleaded in defendants’ answer would not involve testimony which is material and necessary to the prosecution of plaintiff’s action within section 288 of the Civil Practice Act. All concur. (The order grants plaintiff’s motion to examine defendants before trial.) Present • — • Sears, P. J., Crosby, Lewis, Cunningham and Dowling, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

255 A.D. 930, 8 N.Y.S.2d 795, 1938 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5881, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/meyer-v-doyle-nyappdiv-1938.