Wessel v. Schwarzler
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Appeal by the plaintiff, Mary Wessel, from an order of the Supreme Court, made at the New York Special Term and entered in the office of the clerk of the county of New York on the 21st day of April, 1911, vacating an order for the examination of the defendant before trial.
1Opinion of the Court
Clarke, J.:
This is an action for $100,000 damages for seduction of plaintiff’s daughter. In Goldmark v. U. S. Electro Galvanizing Co. (111 App. Div. 526) this court said: “ The rule that the affidavit must state the facts and circumstances to show that the deposition of the proposed witness is material and necessary to the party making the application, is intended to prevent an abuse of the permission to examine an adverse party, so that a party to an action will not be allowed to examine his opponents for an ulterior or improper purpose * * *. The right given by these sections of the Code is…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Goldmark v. U. S. Electro-Galvanizing Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1906
- Wood v. Charles W. Hoffman Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1907
- Oakes v. Star Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1907
- Lawson v. HotchkissAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1910
- Ehrich v. RootAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1907
3Cited by17 opinions
- In re the Estate of HodgmanNew York Surrogate's Court · 1920
- Kornbluth v. IsaacsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1912
- Simons v. SimonsNew York Supreme Court · 1944
- Goldberg v. GoldbergAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1918
- Berger v. HerbertNew York Supreme Court · 1913
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.