Legal Opinion
Dibble v. Consolidated Rail Corp.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided March 13, 1992No. Appeal No. 1PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
— Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly directed plaintiff to respond to all questions he had previously refused to answer at the examination before trial. " '[Ujnless a question is clearly violative of a witnesses] constitutional rights, or of some privilege recognized in law, or is palpably irrelevant, questions [at an examination before trial] should be freely permitted and answered, since all objections other than those as to form are preserved for the trial and may be raised at that time’ (Watson v State of New York, 53 AD2d 798, 799)” (Humiston v…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Dillenbeck v. HessNew York Court of Appeals · 1989
- Watson v. StateAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1976
- White v. MartinsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1984
- Wachtman v. Trocaire CollegeAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1988
- Humiston v. GroseAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1988
3Cited by6 opinions
- Roggow v. WalkerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2003
- Geraci v. National Fuel Gas Distribution Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1998
- Mora v. Saint Vincent's Catholic Medical CenterNew York Supreme Court · 2005
- Sciara v. Surgical Associates of Western New York, P.C.New York Supreme Court · 2011
- Sgambellone v. WheatleyNew York Supreme Court · 1995
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.