Smith v. Perma-Maid Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Smith v. Perma-Maid Co.

259 A.D. 798, 19 N.Y.S.2d 489, 1940 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6701

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

DecidedMarch 21, 1940

StatusPublished

This text of 259 A.D. 798 (Smith v. Perma-Maid Co.) 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

Smith v. Perma-Maid Co., 259 A.D. 798, 19 N.Y.S.2d 489, 1940 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6701 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1940).

Pincite

Opinion

Order modified by striking out subdivision “ b ” of the fourth ordering paragraph and as modified affirmed, without costs of this appeal to either party. Memorandum: The appellant asks that the order appealed from be modified by striking out paragraph “ b ” of the fourth ordering paragraph of the order in question. The affidavit upon which the order is based fails to show that at the time of the accident and for a period of six months prior thereto or for any period less than six months prior thereto the defendant corporation had in its employ any employees in the same class as the defendant Van Cise. In the absence of such an allegation the Special Term should not have ordered the production of the records mentioned in said paragraph “ b.” All concur. (The order grants plaintiff’s motion for an examination before trial, in an automobile negligence action.) Present —• Crosby, P. J., Cunningham, Dowling, Harris and McCum, JJ.

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

Order modified by striking out subdivision “ b ” of the fourth ordering paragraph and as modified affirmed, without costs of this appeal to either party. Memorandum: The appellant asks that the order appealed from be modified by striking out paragraph “ b ” of the fourth ordering paragraph of the order in question. The affidavit upon which the order is based fails to show that at the time of the accident and for a period of six months prior thereto or for any period less than six months prior thereto the defendant corporation had in its employ any employees in the same class as the defendant Van Cise. In the absence of such an allegation the Special Term should not have ordered the production of the records mentioned in said paragraph “ b.” All concur. (The order grants plaintiff’s motion for an examination before trial, in an automobile negligence action.) Present —• Crosby, P. J., Cunningham, Dowling, Harris and McCum, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

259 A.D. 798, 19 N.Y.S.2d 489, 1940 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6701, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smith-v-perma-maid-co-nyappdiv-1940.