Muller v. Ackerman

246 A.D. 849
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided January 15, 1936·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

Order, in so far as an appeal is taken therefrom, denying examination before trial of defendant Ackerman, reversed on the law, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion granted, with ten dollars costs; the examination to proceed on five days’ notice. If the action were for an accounting alone the plaintiff would not be entitled to the examination, but the action is for more than an accounting. The complaint alleges that plaintiff — a eoadventurer —• has been deprived of his property and its profits through the fraud of respondent, who acted in a fiduciary capacity. Under the circumstances plaintiff was entitled to examine defendant with respect to the items mentioned in the notice of motion. (Wertheim v. Grombecker, 229 App. Div. 16; Muller v. Ackerman, 246 id. 639.) Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Davis, Johnston and Adel, JJ., concur.

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

Muller v. Ackerman, 246 A.D. 849 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1936).

246 A.D. 849 (Muller v. Ackerman) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Oboler v. Beakatron Manufacturing Corp.
17 A.D.2d 639 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1962)
Martell v. Martell
7 A.D.2d 641 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1958)
Anderson v. Hinrichs
263 A.D. 954 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1942)
Tricarico v. Society of Saint Joseph Palo Del Colle, Italy, Inc.
252 A.D. 785 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1937)