Bagley v. Winslow
New York Supreme Court
Motion to vacate an order to examine the defendant before trial.
1Opinion of the CourtKruse, J.
It may be regarded as settled by the Court of Appeals that an order to examine a party to an action at the instance of his adversary is a discretionary order. Jenkins v. Putnam, 106 N. Y. 272. Without attempting to lay down any general rule when such an examination may be properly had, or to harmonize the various decisions in this State, it may be said that courts now generally require the necessity to be shown for having such an examination before the trial. Hay v. Zeiger, 50 App. Div. 462; Williams v. Folsom, 52 Hun, 68; Skinner v. Steele, 88 id. 307; Britton v. McDonald, 3 Misc. Rep. 514.…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Jenkins v. . PutnamNew York Court of Appeals · 1887
- Carter v. GoodNew York Supreme Court · 1890
- Williams v. FolsomNew York Supreme Court · 1889
- Presbrey v. Public Opinion Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1896
- Britton v. MacdonaldNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1893
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.