Legal Opinion

Aldrich v. Morningside Heights Housing Corp.

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Decided February 2, 1956PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Per curiam

Generally, the practice of not promptly complying with a demand for a bill of particulars or moving with respect thereto, if the demand is deemed improper, should be discouraged. The failure of plaintiffs to serve a bill of particulars within the time specified in the order of preclusion undoubtedly prejudiced the defendant under all the circumstances of this case. However, if plaintiffs were to proceed to trial with the order of preclusion outstanding, their offer of proof would be met by objection based thereon and a dismissal would not be on the merits but for failure of proof. Thus,…

2Cited by3 opinions

  1. Greenberg v. De HartNew York Court of Appeals · 1958
  2. 50 E. 191st St. Assoc. v. GomezCivil Court of the City of New York · 1990
  3. Greenberg v. De HartNew York Court of Appeals · 1958

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

Powered by the Exa API