Legal Opinion

Konopka v. La Purka

New York Supreme Court

Decided June 25, 1957PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtL. Babrom Hill, J.

By this motion plaintiff La Purka seeks an order of discovery and inspection to permit him to see a statement, heretofore signed by him, concerning the accident. The statement was obtained by a representative of defendant, no copy being supplied to plaintiff, at a time .when plaintiff was recuperating from his injuries. The “ adjustor ”, when obtaining the statement, represented to plaintiff that it would facilitate the settlement of plaintiff’s claim. Subsequently, plaintiff obtained an attorney and commenced this action which, has been consolidated for trial.

Defendant resists the motion…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Herlihy v. CostaNew York Supreme Court · 1957
  2. La Maida v. Miledna Realty Corp.Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1944
  3. Sack v. All States Holding Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1944
  4. Scavone v. BushNew York Supreme Court · 1948

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Bassney v. Erie RailroadNew York Supreme Court · 1960
  2. Mallon v. GinsbergNew York Supreme Court · 1958
  3. Norheim v. Greyhound Corp.New York Supreme Court · 1959

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

Powered by the Exa API