New York Supreme Court, 1893

Depierris v. Slaven

New York Supreme Court · Decided December 15, 1893

26 N.Y.S. 970; 58 N.Y. St. Rep. 157; 74 Hun 628 (New York Supplement)

Counsel

G. H. Adams, for plaintiff., A. H. Joline, for defendants.

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

The objection that the papers upon which the-' order for examination was granted did not comply with subdivision. 1 of section 872 of the Code1 seems to be fatal to this proceeding. The order denying the motion to vacate the order for examination-should be reversed, with costs, and the order vacating the examination as to persons not parties to the action should be affirmed; upon-payment of which costs, the plaintiff to have leave to renew her application for examination of defendants.

Subdivision 1 of section 872 provides that the affidavits upon which the-application is made shall set forth “the names and residences of all the-parties to the action, and whether or net they have appeared; and, if" either of them has appeared by attorney, the name and the residence or-office address of the attorney.”

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.