Legal Opinion
Fizette v. Riverview Plaza, Inc.
New York Supreme Court
Decided August 27, 1963PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtDomenick L. Gabrielli, J.
The challenged bill of particulars was served with the verification having been made by plaintiff’s attorney because the plaintiff was not a resident of the county where plaintiff’s attorney maintains his office.
The motion to strike the bill of particulars upon the above ground is denied.
This is a negligence action. In response to a demand for the specific items of claimed negligence, the bill of particulars stated: “ 3. Plaintiff does not, at this time, have knowledge of *2the specific facts constituting the negligence of the defendants, and each of them, and, therefore, relies upon the theory…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Goodheart v. American Airlines, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1937
- DeRoire v. Lehigh Valley RailroadAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1923
- King v. CraddockAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1937
- Bailey v. Bethlehem Steel Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1951
- Haines v. City of NewburghAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1932
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Pacos Construction Co. v. StateAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1973
- Aker v. KellyNew York Supreme Court · 1966
- O'Dell v. TurnerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1978
- Watrous v. HarrisNew York Supreme Court · 1972