Skidelsky v. Rosenbloom

155 N.Y.S. 616
CourtCity of New York Municipal Court
DecidedJune 1, 1915
StatusPublished

This text of 155 N.Y.S. 616 (Skidelsky v. Rosenbloom) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering City of New York Municipal Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Skidelsky v. Rosenbloom, 155 N.Y.S. 616 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1915).

Opinion

¡SCHMUCK, J.

Motion denied. The order for examination before trial complies with the requirements of section 872 of the Code of Civil Procedure, and- therefore should not be disturbed. The mere fact that plaintiff can obtain the information sought of the defendant by the examination from other sources is no reason why the order should be disturbed. Personal knowledge of the plaintiff, or the fact that she has other evidence of the issue is no bar to her examining her adversary under section 870 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Richards v. Whiting, 127 App. Div. 208, 111 N. Y. Supp. 21.

Order signed.

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

Related

Richards v. Whiting
127 A.D. 208 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1908)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
155 N.Y.S. 616, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/skidelsky-v-rosenbloom-nynyccityct-1915.