Rosenwasser Bros. v. Blyn

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Rosenwasser Bros. v. Blyn

224 A.D. 864

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

DecidedOctober 15, 1928

DocketAppeal No. 2

StatusPublished

This text of 224 A.D. 864 (Rosenwasser Bros. v. Blyn) 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

Rosenwasser Bros. v. Blyn, 224 A.D. 864 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1928).

Pincite

Opinion

Order modified by denying the motion to examine the witnesses Ryan and Gold, and the application for a subpoenaing of the books and documents of Blyn Shoes, Ihe., and as thus modified affirmed, in so far as appealed from, without costs. The examination of Ryan and Gold as witnesses, being employees and officers of a corporation not a party to the action, is not authorized herein by the “ special circumstances ” clause of section 288 of the Civil Practice Act. Lazansky, P. J., Rich, Kapper, Hagarty and Carswell, JJ., concur.

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

Order modified by denying the motion to examine the witnesses Ryan and Gold, and the application for a subpoenaing of the books and documents of Blyn Shoes, Ihe., and as thus modified affirmed, in so far as appealed from, without costs. The examination of Ryan and Gold as witnesses, being employees and officers of a corporation not a party to the action, is not authorized herein by the “ special circumstances ” clause of section 288 of the Civil Practice Act. Lazansky, P. J., Rich, Kapper, Hagarty and Carswell, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

224 A.D. 864, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rosenwasser-bros-v-blyn-nyappdiv-1928.