From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Barnello v. Paul-Jeffrey Co., Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
May 5, 1954
283 App. Div. 996 (N.Y. App. Div. 1954)

Opinion

May 5, 1954.

Appeal from Onondaga County Court.

Present — McCurn, P.J., Vaughan, Kimball, Piper and Wheeler, JJ.


Order of Onondaga County Court and order of Syracuse Municipal Court reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and motion denied, without costs. Memorandum: In this action for breach of warranty of merchantability and fitness for resale of goods sold to the plaintiff by the defendant, the defendant served notice to examine the plaintiff, as an adverse party, before trial. Upon motion of the plaintiff, in the Municipal Court of the City of Syracuse, the notice of examination was vacated and upon appeal, the County Court of Onondaga County affirmed the Municipal Court order. The Municipal Court of the City of Syracuse is a court of record and the defendant is entitled to the examination pursuant to section 288 of the Civil Practice Act. It is immaterial as to which of the parties has the burden of proof and the fact that the plaintiff has furnished a bill of particulars does not preclude his examination as an adverse party. The present practice is well established and recognized. Since there was no motion to limit the scope of the examination, we do not pass upon that point. The order vacating the notice of examination should be reversed. All concur.


Summaries of

Barnello v. Paul-Jeffrey Co., Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
May 5, 1954
283 App. Div. 996 (N.Y. App. Div. 1954)
Case details for

Barnello v. Paul-Jeffrey Co., Inc.

Case Details

Full title:HENRY BARNELLO, Respondent, v. PAUL-JEFFREY Co., INC., Appellant

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department

Date published: May 5, 1954

Citations

283 App. Div. 996 (N.Y. App. Div. 1954)

Citing Cases

Timmes v. Yeager

order of said court dated the same day as granted plaintiff's cross motion for a protective order vacating…

Tilson v. Bark

It is adequate and responsive to the demand, except as to her precise menstrual cycle for a year prior to…