Legal Opinion

Klein v. Pothmont

New York Supreme Court

Decided September 15, 1922PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMarsh, J.

Though the theory of the complaint is somewhat obscure, no criticism has been directed to either the form or the substance of the pleading, and this motion to vacate a notice for examination of the deponent will, therefore, be determined in the light of the issues as they appear on the face of the papers. An attorney’s affidavit on the motion to vacate is sufficient; in fact, there is no absolute requirement of any affidavit whatever. Civil Practice Act, § 291; Rules of Civil Practice, rule 124. Nor does a formal averment of materiality and necessity seem essential to support the notice, if…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Ewen v. HoeferAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1913

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. People's Bank v. HelmsSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1927
  2. Kirman v. FriesNew York Supreme Court · 1927

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

Powered by the Exa API