Tinghitella v. Mullen

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Tinghitella v. Mullen

24 A.D.2d 458, 260 N.Y.S.2d 614, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4033

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

DecidedJune 1, 1965

StatusPublished

This text of 24 A.D.2d 458 (Tinghitella v. Mullen) 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

Tinghitella v. Mullen, 24 A.D.2d 458, 260 N.Y.S.2d 614, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4033 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

In a negligence action to recover damages for the wrongful death of plaintiff’s intestate resulting from an automobile accident, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, entered October 27, 1964, which denied his motion, pursuant to CPLR 3122, for a protective order vacating plaintiff’s notice for diseoveiy and inspection of all statements concerning the accident made by defendant to his insurer between the date of the accident and the date of the commencement of this action. Order reversed on the law, without costs, and motion granted (see Finegold v. Lewis, 22 A D 2d 447; Kandel v. Tocher, 22 A D 2d 513). Beldoek, P. J., Ughetta, Christ, Hill and Rabin, JJ., concur.

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

In a negligence action to recover damages for the wrongful death of plaintiff’s intestate resulting from an automobile accident, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, entered October 27, 1964, which denied his motion, pursuant to CPLR 3122, for a protective order vacating plaintiff’s notice for diseoveiy and inspection of all statements concerning the accident made by defendant to his insurer between the date of the accident and the date of the commencement of this action. Order reversed on the law, without costs, and motion granted (see Finegold v. Lewis, 22 A D 2d 447; Kandel v. Tocher, 22 A D 2d 513). Beldoek, P. J., Ughetta, Christ, Hill and Rabin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

24 A.D.2d 458, 260 N.Y.S.2d 614, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4033, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tinghitella-v-mullen-nyappdiv-1965.