Legal Opinion

Vogel v. Testa

New York Supreme Court

Decided April 7, 1958PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtL. Barron Hill, J.

On this motion to strike defendant’s answer for failure to appear and be examined before trial, the *773defendant has consented to appear and be examined, providing the examination is taken by a competent shorthand reporter and not by a mechanical recording machine. Th e plaintiff asserts that he has a right to have the examination taken by a recording machine.

Thus far, there appears to be a division of opinion among the justices of this court who have passed upon the propriety of recording examinations before trial. In Gotthelf v. Hillcrest Lbr. Co. (280 App. Div. 668) a three-two majority of…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Gotthelf v. Hillcrest Lumber Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1952
  2. Dudley v. Bonhomme Realty Co.New York Supreme Court · 1956
  3. Gelman v. PepperNew York Supreme Court · 1954

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Bradshaw v. BestAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1958

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

Powered by the Exa API