Legal Opinion
Desimone v. Robertson
New York Supreme Court
Decided July 27, 1959PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtFrank Del Vecchio, J.
These are motions by the defendant in each case for orders precluding plaintiffs from giving any evidence as to certain specified matters in the above-entitled actions.. Plaintiffs have made cross motions to vacate and/or modify the demands for bills of particulars and to compel acceptance by defendant of the bills of particulars already served.
Defendant questions the timeliness of plaintiffs’ motions addressed to the demands, which were not made within the five-day period prescribed by rule 115 of the Rules of Civil Practice. Such delinquency on the part of plaintiffs’ counsel does not" make…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Steinau v. Metropolitan Street Railway Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1901
- McCready v. Island Park-Long Beach, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1932
- Townsend v. HalbertNew York Supreme Court · 1944
- Greene v. JohnsonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1908
- Curran v. PorkarAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1954
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Coonradt v. WalcoNew York Supreme Court · 1967
- Whirl Knits, Inc. v. Adler Business Machines, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1976
- Rotondi v. VaughanNew York Supreme Court · 1961
- Baldwin v. TinkerNew York Supreme Court · 1965
- Dusing v. RosascoNew York Supreme Court · 1961
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.