Purvin v. Grey

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Purvin v. Grey

275 A.D.2d 688

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

DecidedFebruary 28, 1949

StatusPublished

This text of 275 A.D.2d 688 (Purvin v. Grey) 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

Purvin v. Grey, 275 A.D.2d 688 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1949).

Pincite

Opinion

In our opinion, however, the first examination of the witness pursuant to the stipulation was inadequate. The matters upon which the examination was to be had were not specified in the stipulation; none of the books, records, minutes or reports was produced upon the examination; and the deposition appears to have been taken primarily in support of plaintiff’s own case. Defendant is entitled to a full examination, with the production of all the specified books, records and documents, in order to aid him in establishing his affirmative defense of the Statute of Limitations. (Higgins v. Crouse, 147 N. Y. 411, 415-416; Sielcken-Schwarz v. American [689]*689Factors, Ltd., 265 N. Y. 239, 243-244; Dyckman v. Dyckman, 230 App. Div. 288, 289; Ectore Realty Co. v. Manufacturers Trust Co., 250 App. Div. 314, 318.) Defendant, through no fault of his, has not had such an examination. Nolan, P. J., Carswell, Adel, Sneed and Wenzel, JJ., concur.

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

In our opinion, however, the first examination of the witness pursuant to the stipulation was inadequate. The matters upon which the examination was to be had were not specified in the stipulation; none of the books, records, minutes or reports was produced upon the examination; and the deposition appears to have been taken primarily in support of plaintiff’s own case. Defendant is entitled to a full examination, with the production of all the specified books, records and documents, in order to aid him in establishing his affirmative defense of the Statute of Limitations. (Higgins v. Crouse, 147 N. Y. 411, 415-416; Sielcken-Schwarz v. American [689]*689Factors, Ltd., 265 N. Y. 239, 243-244; Dyckman v. Dyckman, 230 App. Div. 288, 289; Ectore Realty Co. v. Manufacturers Trust Co., 250 App. Div. 314, 318.) Defendant, through no fault of his, has not had such an examination. Nolan, P. J., Carswell, Adel, Sneed and Wenzel, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

275 A.D.2d 688, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/purvin-v-grey-nyappdiv-1949.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack