Parham v. Hellebush

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Parham v. Hellebush

263 A.D. 965, 33 N.Y.S.2d 10, 1942 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7629

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

DecidedFebruary 16, 1942

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 263 A.D. 965 (Parham v. Hellebush) 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

Parham v. Hellebush, 263 A.D. 965, 33 N.Y.S.2d 10, 1942 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7629 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1942).

Pincite

Opinion

Action to recover damages for personal injuries alleged to have been sustained through the negligence of defendants. Order denying plaintiff’s motion for examination of-defendants before trial modified on the law and the facts by striking out everything following the words “ hereby is ” and inserting in place thereof the following: “ granted as to items 3 and 4, and in other respects denied.” As so modified, the order, in so far as appealed from, is [966]*966affirmed, without costs. Defendants being willing to adroit operation and control, plaintiff withdraws items 1 and 2; and defendants being willing to furnish a copy of the release, examination as to items 5 and 6 is unnecessary. It was an improvident exercise of discretion to .deny the examination as to items 3 and 4. (Ehrlich v. New York Central R. R. Co., 251 App. Div. 721; Foley v. Long Island R. R. Co., 242 id. 780.) The examination is to take place in Westchester county. Hagarty, Carswell, Johnston, Taylor and Close, JJ., concur. Settle order on notice.

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

Action to recover damages for personal injuries alleged to have been sustained through the negligence of defendants. Order denying plaintiff’s motion for examination of-defendants before trial modified on the law and the facts by striking out everything following the words “ hereby is ” and inserting in place thereof the following: “ granted as to items 3 and 4, and in other respects denied.” As so modified, the order, in so far as appealed from, is [966]*966affirmed, without costs. Defendants being willing to adroit operation and control, plaintiff withdraws items 1 and 2; and defendants being willing to furnish a copy of the release, examination as to items 5 and 6 is unnecessary. It was an improvident exercise of discretion to .deny the examination as to items 3 and 4. (Ehrlich v. New York Central R. R. Co., 251 App. Div. 721; Foley v. Long Island R. R. Co., 242 id. 780.) The examination is to take place in Westchester county. Hagarty, Carswell, Johnston, Taylor and Close, JJ., concur. Settle order on notice.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

263 A.D. 965, 33 N.Y.S.2d 10, 1942 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7629, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/parham-v-hellebush-nyappdiv-1942.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack