Legal Opinion

Reuss v. Moiseenko

New York Supreme Court

Decided February 9, 1959PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtAron Steuer, J.

This is a motion to consolidate two actions arising out of the same vehicular collision. There is no real opposition to the relief as such. Each of the actions is by one of the drivers against the other. It appears that one of the plaintiffs-defendants is a resident of Akron, Ohio, and he has never been examined before trial. A motion to examine him in the action in which he was plaintiff (an action pending in the Municipal Court) was granted with the proviso that the examination be held five days before trial. His opponent now desires to make it a condition of granting the consolidation that…

2Cited by1 opinion

  1. Grimm & Davis v. GoldbergCivil Court of the City of New York · 1979

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

Powered by the Exa API