Legal Opinion

Jerry & Herbert Lehmann, Inc. v. Turtle Bros.

New York Supreme Court

Decided December 4, 1933PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCollins, J.

The defendant moves under section 324 of the Civil Practice Act for the privilege of subjecting to tests shoes in the possession of the plaintiff, and which were made of linen material supplied to the plaintiff by the defendant. The issue in litigation is whether or not the material was fit for the purpose purchased. The plaintiff insists that the power “ to make discovery of any article or property * * * relating to the merits of the action, or of the defense therein ” (Civ. Prac. Act, § 324), does not permit or contemplate such tests as are here sought. (Beauty Silk Mfg. Co., Inc., v.…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Hollister v. RobertsonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1924
  2. Beauty Silk Manufacturing Co. v. KrumholzNew York Supreme Court · 1931

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Reiss v. Kirkman & Son, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1934
  2. Edwardes v. Southampton Hospital Ass'nNew York Supreme Court · 1967
  3. Merriam Display Studio, Inc. v. HarlambidesSyracuse City Court · 1949
  4. Consolidated Dairy Products Co. v. Loft, Inc.New York Supreme Court · 1935
  5. Fuchsman v. George Raptis Yarns, Inc.New York Supreme Court · 1950

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

Powered by the Exa API