Overgaard v. Brooklyn Bus Corp.

257 A.D. 829, 12 N.Y.S.2d 216, 1939 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8062
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided May 1, 1939·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

— Order denying plaintiff’s motion for leave to amend his bill of particulars in an action for personal injuries and property damage reversed on the law and the facts, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and the motion granted, without costs, on condition that plaintiff submit to a physical examination on the part of the defendant (if latter so desires) with respect to the subject-matter of the proposed amendment to the bill of particulars. In the event that plaintiff is not made' accessible for such an examination, the order is affirmed. The proposed amendment did not in any manner change the cause of action and its amendment involved no prejudice to the defendant. (Kyle v. City of New York, 155 App. Div. 401.) Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Carswell, Adel and Close, JJ., concur.

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

Overgaard v. Brooklyn Bus Corp., 257 A.D. 829, 12 N.Y.S.2d 216, 1939 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8062 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1939).

257 A.D. 829 (Overgaard v. Brooklyn Bus Corp.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Ponte v. Slyvan Drug Inc.
40 A.D.2d 874 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1972)
Bernas v. Kepner
36 A.D.2d 58 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1971)
Pensavalle v. Vivona
25 A.D.2d 447 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1966)
Lindenman v. Thompson
43 Misc. 2d 30 (New York Supreme Court, 1964)
Howe v. State
33 Misc. 2d 147 (New York State Court of Claims, 1962)
Rasa v. City of New York
277 A.D.2d 780 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1950)