People ex rel. Mullins v. Warden of New York City Prison

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People ex rel. Mullins v. Warden of New York City Prison

5 A.D.2d 987, 173 N.Y.S.2d 992, 1958 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6108

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

DecidedApril 29, 1958

StatusPublished

This text of 5 A.D.2d 987 (People ex rel. Mullins v. Warden of New York City Prison) 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

People ex rel. Mullins v. Warden of New York City Prison, 5 A.D.2d 987, 173 N.Y.S.2d 992, 1958 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6108 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1958).

Pincite

Opinion

Order denying defendants’ motion to vacate plaintiff’s notice to examine defendants before trial modified, on the law and in the exercise of discretion, to eliminate the items of examination and to provide that the examination proceed with respect to the relevant material allegations of fact put in issue by the pleadings in the action, as provided by rule 121-a of the Rules of Civil Practice, as last amended, with $20 costs and disbursements to plaintiff-respondent. It is not necessary to consider the objections to the items of examination, since in the light of the recent amendment to rule 121-a the examination may proceed thereunder. The defendant, Herman Lerner, will appear for examination at Special Term, Part II, of the Supreme Court, New York County, on May 5, 1958, at 11:00 a.m. Settle order.

Concur — Botein, P. J., Breitel, Rabin, Frank and McNally, JJ.

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

Order denying defendants’ motion to vacate plaintiff’s notice to examine defendants before trial modified, on the law and in the exercise of discretion, to eliminate the items of examination and to provide that the examination proceed with respect to the relevant material allegations of fact put in issue by the pleadings in the action, as provided by rule 121-a of the Rules of Civil Practice, as last amended, with $20 costs and disbursements to plaintiff-respondent. It is not necessary to consider the objections to the items of examination, since in the light of the recent amendment to rule 121-a the examination may proceed thereunder. The defendant, Herman Lerner, will appear for examination at Special Term, Part II, of the Supreme Court, New York County, on May 5, 1958, at 11:00 a.m. Settle order.

Concur — Botein, P. J., Breitel, Rabin, Frank and McNally, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

5 A.D.2d 987, 173 N.Y.S.2d 992, 1958 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6108, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-ex-rel-mullins-v-warden-of-new-york-city-prison-nyappdiv-1958.