Pumilia v. Pumilia

New York Supreme Court

Pumilia v. Pumilia

184 Misc. 1018, 55 N.Y.S.2d 599, 1945 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1888

DecidedMay 18, 1945

StatusPublished

This text of 184 Misc. 1018 (Pumilia v. Pumilia) 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

Pumilia v. Pumilia, 184 Misc. 1018, 55 N.Y.S.2d 599, 1945 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1888 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1945).

Pincite

Opinion

Hallinan, J.

Motion to examine Kings County Hospital before' trial, as a witness in this divorce action, denied. Aside from the fact that I do not deem the limited examination here sought necessary, in view of the defendant’s attitude as evidenced by her “ waiver ” sworn to May 7, 1945, the institution sought to be examined by its superintendent is owned by a municipal corporation and operated by its Commissioner of Hospitals. I do not see how such a hospital can be examined before trial as a witness.

Formerly there was no authority to examine before trial either as a party or otherwise, any municipal corporation, its agencies, departments or employees. By section 292-a of the Civil Practice Act, as amended, authority to permit such an examination was granted “ Where a public corporation is a party to an action, or an original owner of a claim * * (Italics supplied.) (See Hammel Station Estates v. City of New York, 184 Misc. 859.)

Here the City of New York, which owns the Kings County Hospital, is neither a party to this action nor the original owner of a claim. Hence there is no statutory authority for the examination. Settle order.

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

Hallinan, J.

Motion to examine Kings County Hospital before' trial, as a witness in this divorce action, denied. Aside from the fact that I do not deem the limited examination here sought necessary, in view of the defendant’s attitude as evidenced by her “ waiver ” sworn to May 7, 1945, the institution sought to be examined by its superintendent is owned by a municipal corporation and operated by its Commissioner of Hospitals. I do not see how such a hospital can be examined before trial as a witness.

Formerly there was no authority to examine before trial either as a party or otherwise, any municipal corporation, its agencies, departments or employees. By section 292-a of the Civil Practice Act, as amended, authority to permit such an examination was granted “ Where a public corporation is a party to an action, or an original owner of a claim * * (Italics supplied.) (See Hammel Station Estates v. City of New York, 184 Misc. 859.)

Here the City of New York, which owns the Kings County Hospital, is neither a party to this action nor the original owner of a claim. Hence there is no statutory authority for the examination. Settle order.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

184 Misc. 1018, 55 N.Y.S.2d 599, 1945 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1888, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pumilia-v-pumilia-nysupct-1945.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack