Legal Opinion
Schonhous v. Weiner
New York Supreme Court
Decided July 31, 1930PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtCollins, J.
This motion presents the frequently perplexing prob-
lem of the right to examine an adverse party before trial in a tort action. The perplexity arises because, despite the broad and liberal provisions of the statutory law which authorizes examinations before trial without regard to the nature of the action, the Appellate Division for the First Department has declared that, whilst the power to allow general examinations in tort actions exists, the power is not to be employed in “ ordinary actions ” unless “ unusual circumstances ” are present. The Appellate Division created the exception “ in…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Jenkins v. . PutnamNew York Court of Appeals · 1887
- Shaw v. Samley Realty Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1922
- Buehler v. BushAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1922
- Middleton v. BoardmanNew York Court of Appeals · 1925
- Kessler v. North River Realty Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1915
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Parker v. BurgoyneCity of New York Municipal Court · 1938
- Fisher v. SmithMichigan Supreme Court · 1932
- Hoyt v. Cornwall HospitalNew York Supreme Court · 1938
- Weiner v. J. I. Hass, Inc.New York Supreme Court · 1936
- Lautum Realty Corp. v. Rodgers & Hagerty, Inc.City of New York Municipal Court · 1939
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.