Legal Opinion
Zeldman v. Electrolux, Inc.
New York City Court
Decided December 19, 1936PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtMorris, J.
This is a motion to strike out defendant’s answer because of the refusal of defendant’s attorney to permit the superintendent of the payroll division of the defendant to sign his examination before trial in view of the fact that the attorney for the plaintiff objected to defendant’s attorney at the conclusion of the examination to include in the deposition the cross-examination of the said superintendent.
The order for the examination was granted without any objection on the part of the defendant.
Section 288 of the Civil Practice Act, in so far as it relates to an examination before trial,…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Colonial Beacon Oil Co. v. B. Taranto, Inc.Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1932
3Cited by5 opinions
- Masciarelli v. Delaware & Hudson RailroadNew York Supreme Court · 1942
- Reliable Textile Co. v. Elk Dye Works, Inc.New York Supreme Court · 1941
- Dworkow v. BachrackNew York Supreme Court · 1948
- Gottfried v. GottfriedNew York Supreme Court · 1950
- Cusumanu v. Pitzer Trucking Co.New York Supreme Court · 1961