People v. Lincoln Spring Co.

New York Supreme Court

People v. Lincoln Spring Co.

64 Misc. 464, 119 N.Y.S. 469

DecidedSeptember 15, 1909

StatusPublished

This text of 64 Misc. 464 (People v. Lincoln Spring Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People v. Lincoln Spring Co., 64 Misc. 464, 119 N.Y.S. 469 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1909).

Pincite

Opinion

McLaughlin, J.

The fact is not disputed that the plaintiff in each of the above cases, when the same was first called for trial, announced itself ready to proceed, and, on the argument of these motions, the fact was not disputed or controverted in any way that each of the officers whose examination was sought had been subpoenaed to attend as a witness at the trial of the actions. This being so T do not see the necessity of an examination prior to the trial. The facts sought to be proved by the examination can, so far as appears, be established by these officers when sworn as witnesses at the trial. If, however, it shall then appear that an examination is necessary, in order to properly present the plaintiff’s case, an application may be made to the "learned justice sitting at the trial.

It seems to me, therefore, the orders permitting the examination should be vacated, without prejudice to the plaintiff’s right to apply, at or during the course of the trial, to the learned justice presiding at the trial for the examination of these same officers or any of them, upon other or additional papers.

. Each motion is, therefore, granted, with ten dollars costs.

Motion granted, with ten dollars costs.

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

McLaughlin, J.

The fact is not disputed that the plaintiff in each of the above cases, when the same was first called for trial, announced itself ready to proceed, and, on the argument of these motions, the fact was not disputed or controverted in any way that each of the officers whose examination was sought had been subpoenaed to attend as a witness at the trial of the actions. This being so T do not see the necessity of an examination prior to the trial. The facts sought to be proved by the examination can, so far as appears, be established by these officers when sworn as witnesses at the trial. If, however, it shall then appear that an examination is necessary, in order to properly present the plaintiff’s case, an application may be made to the "learned justice sitting at the trial.

It seems to me, therefore, the orders permitting the examination should be vacated, without prejudice to the plaintiff’s right to apply, at or during the course of the trial, to the learned justice presiding at the trial for the examination of these same officers or any of them, upon other or additional papers.

. Each motion is, therefore, granted, with ten dollars costs.

Motion granted, with ten dollars costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

64 Misc. 464, 119 N.Y.S. 469, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-lincoln-spring-co-nysupct-1909.