Yor Electric Corp. v. Benowitz

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Yor Electric Corp. v. Benowitz

3 A.D.2d 832, 161 N.Y.S.2d 705, 1957 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5759

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

DecidedApril 23, 1957

StatusPublished

This text of 3 A.D.2d 832 (Yor Electric Corp. v. Benowitz) 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

Yor Electric Corp. v. Benowitz, 3 A.D.2d 832, 161 N.Y.S.2d 705, 1957 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5759 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1957).

Pincite

Opinion

Order unanimously affirmed. The date for the examination to proceed shall be fixed in the order. Settle order on notice. In affirming this order we do not overlook the fact that the last pleading served in this action was the answer of the defendant-appellant to the amended complaint, which answer was served on October 9, 1956. The notice to examine him was served on October 22, 1956, 13 days after the service of the last pleading. He urges the procedure thus adopted by the plaintiff was premature in the light of the provisions of subdivision 1 of rule XX of the Bronx County Supreme Court Rules, and argues the order below should be reversed on this ground alone. We are of the opinion that the defendant-appellant’s objection to the notice of examination grounded on rule XX has been waived since it was not advanced at Special Term. Concur — Botein, J. P., Rabin, Frank, Valente and McNally, JJ.

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

Order unanimously affirmed. The date for the examination to proceed shall be fixed in the order. Settle order on notice. In affirming this order we do not overlook the fact that the last pleading served in this action was the answer of the defendant-appellant to the amended complaint, which answer was served on October 9, 1956. The notice to examine him was served on October 22, 1956, 13 days after the service of the last pleading. He urges the procedure thus adopted by the plaintiff was premature in the light of the provisions of subdivision 1 of rule XX of the Bronx County Supreme Court Rules, and argues the order below should be reversed on this ground alone. We are of the opinion that the defendant-appellant’s objection to the notice of examination grounded on rule XX has been waived since it was not advanced at Special Term. Concur — Botein, J. P., Rabin, Frank, Valente and McNally, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

3 A.D.2d 832, 161 N.Y.S.2d 705, 1957 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5759, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/yor-electric-corp-v-benowitz-nyappdiv-1957.