Van Orden v. Madow

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Van Orden v. Madow

207 A.D. 827

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

DecidedOctober 15, 1923

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 207 A.D. 827 (Van Orden v. Madow) 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

Van Orden v. Madow, 207 A.D. 827 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1923).

Pincite

Opinion

Order reversed upon the law, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion to vacate order granted, with ten dollars costs, upon the ground that the direction that plaintiff submit to an X-ray photograph is not authorized by Civil Practice Act, section 306. Kelly, P. J., Rich and Manning, JJ., concur; Kelby and Young, JJ., dissent, being of opinion that the X-ray photograph is authorized as an incident of the physical examination.

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

Order reversed upon the law, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion to vacate order granted, with ten dollars costs, upon the ground that the direction that plaintiff submit to an X-ray photograph is not authorized by Civil Practice Act, section 306. Kelly, P. J., Rich and Manning, JJ., concur; Kelby and Young, JJ., dissent, being of opinion that the X-ray photograph is authorized as an incident of the physical examination.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

207 A.D. 827, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/van-orden-v-madow-nyappdiv-1923.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack