Legal Opinion

Kaufman v. Rosenbach

New York County Courts

Decided March 22, 1956Published

1Opinion of the CourtRichard J. Sherman, J.

Plaintiff moved for an examination such examination before trial is within the discretion of the court. (Public Nat. Bank v. National City Bank, 261 N. Y. 316.) of the defendant pursuant to sections 288 and 290 of the Civil Practice Act. The defendant secured an order to show cause with stay for the purpose of vacating the notice of examination.

I have examined the law with respect to the proposed examination of the defendant by the plaintiff. The law is clear that

The case cited by the defendant (Ralph v. Schicker, 162 Misc 380) merely attempts to qualify the decisions of the appellate courts…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Marie Dorros, Inc. v. Dorros Bros.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1948
  2. Public National Bank v. National City BankNew York Court of Appeals · 1933
  3. Marine Trust Co. v. Nuway Devices, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1923
  4. McGrath v. BlumenthalAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1927
  5. Eagle-Picher Lead Co. v. Mansfield Paint Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1922

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API