Orbach ex rel. Jarold Shops, Inc. v. Diamond

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Orbach ex rel. Jarold Shops, Inc. v. Diamond

278 A.D. 651, 102 N.Y.S.2d 1022, 1951 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4216

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided February 27, 1951·Published

Opinion

Order unanimously modified by deleting from items 1, 5, 6, 7 and 8 of the notice of examination the words “fradulently and unlawfully ” and “ unlawful reasons ” and by directing that books and papers relevant to the subject of examination are to be produced pursuant to section 296 of the Civil Practice Act instead of in accordance with Beeber v. Empire Power Go. (260 App. Div. 68, and cases there cited) and, as so modified, affirmed, without costs. The date for the examination to proceed shall be fixed in the order. Settle order on notice. Present — Peck, P, J., Cohn, Callahan, Van Voorhis and Heffernan, JJ.

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

Order unanimously modified by deleting from items 1, 5, 6, 7 and 8 of the notice of examination the words “fradulently and unlawfully ” and “ unlawful reasons ” and by directing that books and papers relevant to the subject of examination are to be produced pursuant to section 296 of the Civil Practice Act instead of in accordance with Beeber v. Empire Power Go. (260 App. Div. 68, and cases there cited) and, as so modified, affirmed, without costs. The date for the examination to proceed shall be fixed in the order. Settle order on notice. Present — Peck, P, J., Cohn, Callahan, Van Voorhis and Heffernan, JJ.

Orbach ex rel. Jarold Shops, Inc. v. Diamond, 278 A.D. 651, 102 N.Y.S.2d 1022, 1951 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4216 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1951).

Pincite

278 A.D. 651 (Orbach ex rel. Jarold Shops, Inc. v. Diamond) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related