Yachnin v. Bedford Home Builders Inc.

228 A.D. 795
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided February 15, 1930·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

— • Order sustaining objections of the witness respondent to questions propounded to him reversed upon the law and the facts, with ten dollars costs and disbursements to appellants, and application to compel him to answer granted, with ten dollars costs. Examination to be continued on five days’ notice at place and hour stated in subpoena. None of the questions propounded directly concerned Bedford Home Builders, Inc., the judgment debtor, for which the witness was attorney. All of the questions involved matters relating to Granway Estates, Inc., and the record fails to show that the witness was attorney for that company or any of its officers. Furthermore, even if the questions had related to Bedford Home Builders, Inc., they did not call for the disclosure of any communication that had been made in confidence; and the communication not being confidential, the attorney was not privileged from disclosing it. (Baumann v. Steingester, 213 N. Y. 328.) Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Carswell, Scudder and Tompkins, JJ., concur.

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

Yachnin v. Bedford Home Builders Inc., 228 A.D. 795 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1930).

228 A.D. 795 (Yachnin v. Bedford Home Builders Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Zimmerman v. Kallimopoulou
56 Misc. 2d 828 (Civil Court of the City of New York, 1967)
Kew Gardens Sanitarium, Inc. v. Trussell
45 Misc. 2d 104 (New York Supreme Court, 1965)