From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Schuster v. City of New York

Supreme Court, Special Term, Kings County
Sep 18, 1959
20 Misc. 2d 519 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1959)

Opinion

September 18, 1959

Harry H. Lipsig and Edward H. Schiff for plaintiff.

Charles H. Tenney, Corporation Counsel ( William J. Ferral of counsel), for defendant.


Motion to examine George P. Monaghan, a former Police Commissioner of the City of New York, as a witness on the ground that said individual is a hostile witness. The former Commissioner may reasonably be presumed to be an unfriendly or unwilling, if not a hostile witness, and the motion to examine him is, therefore, granted. The motion papers do not indicate the items upon which the examination is to be had and such examination will therefore be limited to the items allowed in the companion motion decided herewith ( Schuster v. City of New York, 20 Misc.2d 516).

Settle order on notice providing for the examination to be held at Special Term, Part II of this court, at a time and on a date to be fixed in the order to be entered hereon if the parties agree. If the parties cannot agree, the court will fix the time.


Summaries of

Schuster v. City of New York

Supreme Court, Special Term, Kings County
Sep 18, 1959
20 Misc. 2d 519 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1959)
Case details for

Schuster v. City of New York

Case Details

Full title:MAX SCHUSTER, as Administrator of the Estate of ARNOLD L. SCHUSTER…

Court:Supreme Court, Special Term, Kings County

Date published: Sep 18, 1959

Citations

20 Misc. 2d 519 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1959)
191 N.Y.S.2d 884

Citing Cases

Sherman v. Hoffman

Additionally, it cannot be denied that the Board is an interested party and as such, while possibly not…