Sheehan v. Phillips

248 A.D. 691

This text of 248 A.D. 691 (Sheehan v. Phillips) 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
Sheehan v. Phillips, 248 A.D. 691 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1936).

Opinion

Order, so far as appealed from, adhering, on reargument, to the original decision in the order entered March 10, 1936, granting in part defendant’s motion to vacate the notice of examination before trial and subpoena duces tecum, unanimously reversed and the said motion denied, except to the extent of excising from the matters embraced in the notice of examination: “ all memoranda, prospectuses, correspondence, books, accounts and other records relating to the above transactions, and all other particulars with regard thereto.” A limited examination of the books and records specified, however, may be had under the provisions of the notice calling for their production under the rule of Zeltner v. Fidelity & Deposit Co. of Maryland (220 App. Div. 21). The date for the examination to proceed to be fixed in the order. Settle order on notice. Present — Martin, P. J., McAvoy, O’Malley, Townley and Glennon, JJ.

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

Related

Zeltner v. Fidelity & Deposit Co.
220 A.D. 21 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1927)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
248 A.D. 691, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sheehan-v-phillips-nyappdiv-1936.