Legal Opinion
Luitwieler v. Luitwieler Pumping Engine Co.
New York Supreme Court
Decided March 15, 1922PublishedCited by 2 opinions
Motion to set aside notice to take testimony by deposition.
1Opinion of the CourtRodenbeck, J.
The defendant has given notice under section 290 of the Civil Practice Act to take testimony in California by deposition. The right to do so is challenged on the ground that the provisions of the Practice Act do not apply to this action, having been pending at the time that the Practice Act took effect, and on the further ground that the testimony is not material.
The Civil Practice Act does not apply to the situation in this case. The act was not intended to apply indiscriminately to all proceedings in all actions and special proceedings pending when it took effect. It expressly provides that…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Bean v. . FlintNew York Court of Appeals · 1912
- MacDonald v. Hamilton B. Wills & Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1921
- Luitwieler v. Luitwieler Pumping Engine Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1921
- Spellissy v. Cook & Bernheimer Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1901
3Cited by2 opinions
- Cohen v. SchlossbergAppellate Court of Illinois · 1958
- Travis Investment Co. v. Harwyn Publishing CorporationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1968