Raymond Lee Organization, Inc. v. Axe

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Raymond Lee Organization, Inc. v. Axe

48 A.D.2d 786, 372 N.Y.S.2d 187, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9961

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

DecidedJune 10, 1975

StatusPublished

This text of 48 A.D.2d 786 (Raymond Lee Organization, Inc. v. Axe) 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

Raymond Lee Organization, Inc. v. Axe, 48 A.D.2d 786, 372 N.Y.S.2d 187, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9961 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County, entered June 14, 1974, unanimously modified, on the law and on the facts, to the extent of striking subdivisions (c), (d), (e), (f) and (h) of paragraph 45 of respondent’s demand for a bill of particulars, and otherwise affirmed, without costs and without disbursements. The items stricken seek disclosure of evidentiary matter not obtainable through a bill of particulars, the purpose of which "is to amplify the pleading, limit the proof and prevent surprise at the trial.” (State of New York v Horsemen’s Benevolent & Protective Assoc. [NY DivJ, 34 AD2d 769, 770.) Concur—Stevens, P. J., Murphy, Lupiano, Capozzoli and Nunez, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County, entered June 14, 1974, unanimously modified, on the law and on the facts, to the extent of striking subdivisions (c), (d), (e), (f) and (h) of paragraph 45 of respondent’s demand for a bill of particulars, and otherwise affirmed, without costs and without disbursements. The items stricken seek disclosure of evidentiary matter not obtainable through a bill of particulars, the purpose of which "is to amplify the pleading, limit the proof and prevent surprise at the trial.” (State of New York v Horsemen’s Benevolent & Protective Assoc. [NY DivJ, 34 AD2d 769, 770.) Concur—Stevens, P. J., Murphy, Lupiano, Capozzoli and Nunez, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

48 A.D.2d 786, 372 N.Y.S.2d 187, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9961, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/raymond-lee-organization-inc-v-axe-nyappdiv-1975.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack