Witmer v. Biehls

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Witmer v. Biehls

219 A.D.2d 870, 632 N.Y.S.2d 43, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11029

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

DecidedSeptember 29, 1995

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 219 A.D.2d 870 (Witmer v. Biehls) 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

Witmer v. Biehls, 219 A.D.2d 870, 632 N.Y.S.2d 43, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11029 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

Order unanimously reversed on the law with costs and motion denied. Memorandum: Supreme Court improvidently exercised its discretion in granting, defendant additional time to complete discovery. By demanding that plaintiff file a note of issue, with the concomitant necessity of filing a statement of readiness, defendant waived his right to further discovery. A demand for such filing is inconsistent with a demand for discovery (see, King v Milazzo, 155 AD2d 1000; Siragusa v Teal’s Express, 96 AD2d 749, 750). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Whelan, J. — Set Aside Note of Issue.) Present — Pine, J. P., Lawton, Wesley, Callahan and Doerr, JJ.

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

Order unanimously reversed on the law with costs and motion denied. Memorandum: Supreme Court improvidently exercised its discretion in granting, defendant additional time to complete discovery. By demanding that plaintiff file a note of issue, with the concomitant necessity of filing a statement of readiness, defendant waived his right to further discovery. A demand for such filing is inconsistent with a demand for discovery (see, King v Milazzo, 155 AD2d 1000; Siragusa v Teal’s Express, 96 AD2d 749, 750). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Whelan, J. — Set Aside Note of Issue.) Present — Pine, J. P., Lawton, Wesley, Callahan and Doerr, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

219 A.D.2d 870, 632 N.Y.S.2d 43, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11029, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/witmer-v-biehls-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack