From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Groff v. Hagan

City Court of New York — General Term
Jun 1, 1895
13 Misc. 322 (N.Y. Misc. 1895)

Opinion

June, 1895.

Ezekiel Fixman, for appellant.

A.R. Bunnell, for respondent.


Without considering all the questions raised by the appellant, there is one reason why the order appealed from should be reversed.

The affidavit upon which the order is made is by the attorney for the plaintiff.

It has been repeatedly held that an order for a bill of particulars will not be granted on the affidavit of the attorney. Van Olinda v. Hall, 31 N.Y.S. 495; Dueber Co. v. Keystone Co., 21 id. 442; Gridley v. Gridley, 7 Civ. Proc. Rep. 215.

The order appealed from must, therefore, be reversed, with costs.

CONLAN, J., concurs.

Order reversed, with costs.


Summaries of

Groff v. Hagan

City Court of New York — General Term
Jun 1, 1895
13 Misc. 322 (N.Y. Misc. 1895)
Case details for

Groff v. Hagan

Case Details

Full title:FREDERICK G. GROFF, as Assignee, Respondent, v . THOMAS HAGAN, Appellant

Court:City Court of New York — General Term

Date published: Jun 1, 1895

Citations

13 Misc. 322 (N.Y. Misc. 1895)
34 N.Y.S. 462

Citing Cases

Webster v. Fitchburg R.R. Co.

No reason is given why the affidavit is made by the attorney for the defendant. It has been repeatedly held…

MORI v. PEARSALL

The signing of the order by me was merely pro forma and unnecessary, and, therefore, does not disqualify me…