Schmitt v. Neapolitan Ice Cream Co.

213 A.D. 884
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided April 15, 1925·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Order granting examination of defendant corporation before trial in part, affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. The learned justice at Special Term was right in 'holding that defendant corporation cannot be examined as a party through persons who have ceased to be officers. (Chartered Bank of India v. North River Ins. Co., 136 App. Div. 646; Duncan v. Jones, 32 Hun, 12.) The bonafides of the termination of relations between the three witnesses and the defendant corporation was not challenged on the papers before the Special Term. Where special circumstances render it proper such persons may be examined before trial as witnesses. (Chittenden v. San Domingo Improvement Co., 132 App. Div. 169.) But that was not the application before the court. As to the other matters eliminated by the [885] Special Term we think the examination as allowed sufficient. Kelly, P. J., Jaycox, Manning, Kelby and Kapper, JJ., concur.

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

Schmitt v. Neapolitan Ice Cream Co., 213 A.D. 884 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1925).

213 A.D. 884 (Schmitt v. Neapolitan Ice Cream Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Frankel v. French & Polyclinic Medical School & Health Center
70 A.D.2d 947 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1979)
Western Elevating Ass'n v. Chapman
238 A.D. 14 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1933)