Boeck v. Smith
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Appeal by the defendants, Alfred H. Smith and another, from so much of 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 3d day of June, 19,03, as denies said defendants’ motion to vacate an order for their examination to enable the plaintiff to frame his complaint.
1Opinion of the Court
Hatch, J.:
The plaintiff has united in his application three specific things: First, an examination of the defendants to enable him to properly frame his complaint; second, an inspection of the books and papers of the defendants; third, an examination of witnesses not parties to the action, for the purpose of perpetuating their testimony. The plaintiff in his affidavit sets up facts showing his knowledge of a perfect cause of action against the defendants. The only thing of which he is ignorant is the exact amount which he is entitled to *576recover. As, however, there is. no rule of pleading…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Horst v. D. G. Yuengling Brewing Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1896
- Bloodgood v. SlaybackAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1901
- In re Erie Malleable Iron Co.New York Supreme Court · 1895
- Dudley v. Press Publishing Co.New York Supreme Court · 1890
3Cited by3 opinions
- In re SandsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1904
- Lee v. WinansAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1904
- Boyle v. Consolidated Gas Co.New York Supreme Court · 1905