Legal Opinion

Colonial Beacon Oil Co. v. B. Taranto, Inc.

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Decided April 6, 1932PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Per curiam

It is immaterial whether the witness was or was not chargeable with contempt. The statute authorizes the striking out of the answer as a punishment in addition to any punishment for contempt. (Civ. Prac. Act, § 405.) That defendant was properly subject to punishment under the circumstances here disclosed follows from our decision in Minneapolis, St. P., etc., R. Co. v. Alcohol Fuel & Molasses Co. (129 Misc. 908), and since its answer consisted wholly of denials which put in issue matters intended to be established by the examination there is no constitutional objection to the imposition of…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Feingold v. . Walworth Bros., Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1924
  2. Minneapolis, St. Paul & Sault Ste. Marie Railway Co. v. Alcohol Fuel & Molasses Co.New York Supreme Court · 1927

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Zeldman v. Electrolux, Inc.New York City Court · 1936
  2. James v. PowellAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1966
  3. Citibank, N.A. v. Souto Geffen Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1993

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API