Page v. Horstmann

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Page v. Horstmann

252 A.D. 918, 300 N.Y.S. 34, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6799

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided November 5, 1937·Published

Opinion

Order reversed on the law and facts, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion denied, with ten dollars costs, on the ground that inasmuch as the affirmative defense relates to a transaction between the defendants’ testator and the plaintiff represented by the person sought to be examined and the plaintiff denies personal knowledge of the transactions conducted on her behalf by the person sought to be examined, special circumstances exist for bis examination within the purview of the third sentence of Civil Practice Act, section 288. All concur, (The order vacates a notice of examination before trial.) Present —■ Sears, P. J., Edgeomb, Crosby, Lewis and Cunningham, JJ.

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

Order reversed on the law and facts, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion denied, with ten dollars costs, on the ground that inasmuch as the affirmative defense relates to a transaction between the defendants’ testator and the plaintiff represented by the person sought to be examined and the plaintiff denies personal knowledge of the transactions conducted on her behalf by the person sought to be examined, special circumstances exist for bis examination within the purview of the third sentence of Civil Practice Act, section 288. All concur, (The order vacates a notice of examination before trial.) Present —■ Sears, P. J., Edgeomb, Crosby, Lewis and Cunningham, JJ.

Page v. Horstmann, 252 A.D. 918, 300 N.Y.S. 34, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6799 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1937).

Pincite

252 A.D. 918 (Page v. Horstmann) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.