From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Laurino v. Pratt

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Dec 1, 1927
222 App. Div. 742 (N.Y. App. Div. 1927)

Summary

In Laurino v. Pratt (222 A.D. 742) the Special Term had vacated a notice for an examination before trial as being a general examination in a tort action.

Summary of this case from Schonhous v. Weiner

Opinion

December, 1927.

Present — Dowling, P.J., Merrell, Finch, McAvoy and Proskauer, JJ.; Merrell, J., dissents on the authority of Shaw v. Samley Realty Co. ( 201 App. Div. 433); Schulte v. Petruzzi (153 id. 889); People v. Natural Carbonic Gas Co. (140 id. 802); Tyler v. Twin City Power Co. (179 id. 652). Settle order on notice.


Order modified by allowing an examination of the defendant before trial upon the following matters and issues: 1. That the plaintiff submitted to treatment and operation on her nose by the defendant during the months of March and April, 1925, and the character and details of such treatment and operation. 2. That the plaintiff submitted to further operation and treatment in July, 1925, by the defendant, and the nature and details of such operation and treatment. And as so modified affirmed, without costs. The date for the examination to proceed to be fixed in the order. No opinion.


Summaries of

Laurino v. Pratt

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Dec 1, 1927
222 App. Div. 742 (N.Y. App. Div. 1927)

In Laurino v. Pratt (222 A.D. 742) the Special Term had vacated a notice for an examination before trial as being a general examination in a tort action.

Summary of this case from Schonhous v. Weiner
Case details for

Laurino v. Pratt

Case Details

Full title:JOSEPHINE LAURINO, Appellant, v. W. AUGUSTUS PRATT, Respondent

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Dec 1, 1927

Citations

222 App. Div. 742 (N.Y. App. Div. 1927)

Citing Cases

Schonhous v. Weiner

In Palmer v. Hampton ( 129 Misc. 417, 419) Mr. Justice SHIENTAG permitted an examination before trial of the…

Goodman v. Stein

We think the defendant should not be permitted to withhold from the plaintiff by whom he was employed the…