Randall v. Schwartz

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Randall v. Schwartz

84 A.D.2d 525, 443 N.Y.S.2d 619, 1981 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15563

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

DecidedOctober 29, 1981

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 84 A.D.2d 525 (Randall v. Schwartz) 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

Randall v. Schwartz, 84 A.D.2d 525, 443 N.Y.S.2d 619, 1981 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15563 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1981).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Schwartz, J.), entered July 24, 1980, denying plaintiff’s motion to punish nonparty witness Mildred Schwartz for contempt upon her failure to comply with a subpoena for examination, unanimously modified, on the law the facts and in the exercise of discretion, to grant the motion for contempt unless the witness appears and submits to oral examination within 20 days of the date of this court’s order, without costs or disbursements. Plaintiff should not be required to examine the witness by written interrogatories in the absence of a certification by a court-designated physician that oral examination would be harmful to her health (Equitable Lbr. Corp. v Northeastern Const. Corp., 43 AD2d 845). Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Ross, Lupiano and Lynch, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Schwartz, J.), entered July 24, 1980, denying plaintiff’s motion to punish nonparty witness Mildred Schwartz for contempt upon her failure to comply with a subpoena for examination, unanimously modified, on the law the facts and in the exercise of discretion, to grant the motion for contempt unless the witness appears and submits to oral examination within 20 days of the date of this court’s order, without costs or disbursements. Plaintiff should not be required to examine the witness by written interrogatories in the absence of a certification by a court-designated physician that oral examination would be harmful to her health (Equitable Lbr. Corp. v Northeastern Const. Corp., 43 AD2d 845). Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Ross, Lupiano and Lynch, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

84 A.D.2d 525, 443 N.Y.S.2d 619, 1981 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15563, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/randall-v-schwartz-nyappdiv-1981.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack