Verschell v. Pike

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Verschell v. Pike

65 A.D.2d 622, 409 N.Y.S.2d 533, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13320

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

DecidedOctober 30, 1978

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 65 A.D.2d 622 (Verschell v. Pike) 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

Verschell v. Pike, 65 A.D.2d 622, 409 N.Y.S.2d 533, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13320 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1978).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action, inter alia, to set aside a conveyance, defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated May 24, 1978, which granted a motion by plaintiff’s former attorney for a protective order. Order reversed, without costs or disbursements, and motion denied. The attorney-client privilege should be raised by a witness at the time of the examination before trial. Should the examiner improperly seek information regarding privileged matters, a witness may then exercise his right to claim privilege (Matter of Macku, 29 AD2d 539). It does not presently appear that any aspect of the prospective examination in the instant case relates to privileged communications. Hopkins, J. P., Martuscello, Gulotta and Shapiro, JJ., concur.

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

In an action, inter alia, to set aside a conveyance, defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated May 24, 1978, which granted a motion by plaintiff’s former attorney for a protective order. Order reversed, without costs or disbursements, and motion denied. The attorney-client privilege should be raised by a witness at the time of the examination before trial. Should the examiner improperly seek information regarding privileged matters, a witness may then exercise his right to claim privilege (Matter of Macku, 29 AD2d 539). It does not presently appear that any aspect of the prospective examination in the instant case relates to privileged communications. Hopkins, J. P., Martuscello, Gulotta and Shapiro, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

65 A.D.2d 622, 409 N.Y.S.2d 533, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13320, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/verschell-v-pike-nyappdiv-1978.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack