Rose Fair, Inc. v. Northville Dock Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Rose Fair, Inc. v. Northville Dock Corp.

18 A.D.2d 814, 1963 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5028

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

DecidedJanuary 7, 1963

StatusPublished

This text of 18 A.D.2d 814 (Rose Fair, Inc. v. Northville Dock Corp.) 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

Rose Fair, Inc. v. Northville Dock Corp., 18 A.D.2d 814, 1963 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5028 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1963).

Pincite

Opinion

In a consolidated action by the plaintiffs to recover damages for breach of contract, breach of warranty, fraud and slander, and by the defendant Northville Dock Corporation to recover the agreed price and reasonable value of goods sold ancl delivered to plaintiffs, and for other relief, the plaintiffs appeal from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated September 27,1962, as denied their motion: (a) to vacate the demand of defendants Northville and Haas, dated July 17, 1962, for a bill of particulars of plaintiffs’ claim; and (b) to vacate said defendants’ notice (dated the same day) to examine plaintiffs before trial. Order, insofar as appealed from, affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. The bill of particulars as demanded shall be served within 20 days after entry of the order hereon; and the examination shall proceed on 10, days’ written notice by said defendants or on any other date mutually fixed by the parties. No opinion. Beldock, P. J., Kleinfeld, Christ, Rabin and Hopkins, J J., concur.

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

In a consolidated action by the plaintiffs to recover damages for breach of contract, breach of warranty, fraud and slander, and by the defendant Northville Dock Corporation to recover the agreed price and reasonable value of goods sold ancl delivered to plaintiffs, and for other relief, the plaintiffs appeal from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated September 27,1962, as denied their motion: (a) to vacate the demand of defendants Northville and Haas, dated July 17, 1962, for a bill of particulars of plaintiffs’ claim; and (b) to vacate said defendants’ notice (dated the same day) to examine plaintiffs before trial. Order, insofar as appealed from, affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. The bill of particulars as demanded shall be served within 20 days after entry of the order hereon; and the examination shall proceed on 10, days’ written notice by said defendants or on any other date mutually fixed by the parties. No opinion. Beldock, P. J., Kleinfeld, Christ, Rabin and Hopkins, J J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

18 A.D.2d 814, 1963 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5028, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rose-fair-inc-v-northville-dock-corp-nyappdiv-1963.