Pardes v. Kanarek

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Pardes v. Kanarek

60 A.D.2d 835, 400 N.Y.S.2d 372, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9846

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

DecidedJanuary 3, 1978

StatusPublished

This text of 60 A.D.2d 835 (Pardes v. Kanarek) 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

Pardes v. Kanarek, 60 A.D.2d 835, 400 N.Y.S.2d 372, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9846 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1978).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action for an accounting of the assets of a law partnership, defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, dated June 22, 1977, which, inter alia, directed him to appear for an examination before trial and produce all partnership books and records in his possession. Order affirmed, with $50 costs and disbursements. The examination shall proceed at the place designated in the order under [836]*836review, at a time to be fixed by plaintiff in a written notice of not less than 10 days, or at such other time and place as the parties may agree. In this prolonged litigation, we reject appellant’s argument that a prior order, dealing solely with the proceeds of negligence actions, became the law of the case. That doctrine, however, would not be binding on this court. Disclosure by both parties of all litigation proceeds will permit disposition of this extensively litigated dispute. Rabin, J. P., Titone, Suozzi and Mollen, JJ., concur.

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

In an action for an accounting of the assets of a law partnership, defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, dated June 22, 1977, which, inter alia, directed him to appear for an examination before trial and produce all partnership books and records in his possession. Order affirmed, with $50 costs and disbursements. The examination shall proceed at the place designated in the order under [836]*836review, at a time to be fixed by plaintiff in a written notice of not less than 10 days, or at such other time and place as the parties may agree. In this prolonged litigation, we reject appellant’s argument that a prior order, dealing solely with the proceeds of negligence actions, became the law of the case. That doctrine, however, would not be binding on this court. Disclosure by both parties of all litigation proceeds will permit disposition of this extensively litigated dispute. Rabin, J. P., Titone, Suozzi and Mollen, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

60 A.D.2d 835, 400 N.Y.S.2d 372, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9846, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pardes-v-kanarek-nyappdiv-1978.