Werner v. Minskoff

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Werner v. Minskoff

30 A.D.2d 801, 291 N.Y.S.2d 981, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3369

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

DecidedJuly 16, 1968

StatusPublished

This text of 30 A.D.2d 801 (Werner v. Minskoff) 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

Werner v. Minskoff, 30 A.D.2d 801, 291 N.Y.S.2d 981, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3369 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1968).

Pincite

Opinion

Orders entered October 18, 1967, unanimously modified, on the facts and the law, to allow examination before trial of defendants Heilman by defendants Minskoff, and as so modified, affirmed, without costs or disbursements. A prior action between the same parties was instituted in Bronx County. While that action was pending various examinations before trial were held. The order in effect denies examination of parties therein examined and allows examination of the party who was not examined. We approve that disposition. However, the Minskoff defendants were not given notice of plaintiff’s examination of the Heilman defendants and did not participate in it. They would be entitled to examine those defendants and are not bound to accept as their examination the one conducted by plaintiff. Concur — Stevens, J. P., Steuer, Capozzoli, Tilzer and McGivern, JJ.

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

Orders entered October 18, 1967, unanimously modified, on the facts and the law, to allow examination before trial of defendants Heilman by defendants Minskoff, and as so modified, affirmed, without costs or disbursements. A prior action between the same parties was instituted in Bronx County. While that action was pending various examinations before trial were held. The order in effect denies examination of parties therein examined and allows examination of the party who was not examined. We approve that disposition. However, the Minskoff defendants were not given notice of plaintiff’s examination of the Heilman defendants and did not participate in it. They would be entitled to examine those defendants and are not bound to accept as their examination the one conducted by plaintiff. Concur — Stevens, J. P., Steuer, Capozzoli, Tilzer and McGivern, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

30 A.D.2d 801, 291 N.Y.S.2d 981, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3369, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/werner-v-minskoff-nyappdiv-1968.