Legal Opinion

Hable v. Anderson

New York Supreme Court

Decided June 14, 1965PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtG. Robert Witmer, J.

Plaintiffs have moved for an order compelling defendants to comply with plaintiffs’ demand for discovery and inspection, the pertinent paragraphs of which are as follows:

“ 1. Any and all statements signed by the defendant, Robert L. Anderson II, and Rochester Coca Cola Bottling Corp., or their agents, servants and/or employees prior to June 4, 1964 and given by defendants or their agents, servants, and/or employees to defendants’ liability1 insurance company’s claims adjuster and/or given by defendant, Rochester Coca Cola Bottling Corp.’s agents, servants and/or employees to defendant,…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Colbert v. Home Indemnity Co.New York Supreme Court · 1965
  2. De Vito v. New York Central RailroadNew York Supreme Court · 1955
  3. Walker v. Erie-Lackawanna RailroadNew York Supreme Court · 1964
  4. Zdonczik v. Pennsylvania & Southern Gas Co.New York Supreme Court · 1962
  5. Rizzuto v. TelescaNew York Supreme Court · 1959

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Weisgold v. Kiamesha Concord, Inc.New York Supreme Court · 1966
  2. Rutherford v. Albany Medical Center HospitalNew York Supreme Court · 1965
  3. Haire v. Long Island Rail RoadNew York Supreme Court · 1967
  4. Indilicato v. Pacific Pool Industries, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1983

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

Powered by the Exa API