Hyperlawhypertext legal database Heilperin v. Levy 116 N.Y.S. 676

← Cases

Heilperin v. Levy

116 N.Y.S. 676 Court N.Y. Sup. Ct. Decision date 1909-01-19 English

Delivered by ERLANGER, J.

Contents

Majority

p. 676
HEILPERIN v. LEVY.
(Supreme Court, Special Term, New York County.
January 19, 1909.)

Headnote

1. Pleading (§ 318[1] )—Bill of Particulars of Defense.
, A bill of particulars of the defense of payment will not be ordered.
[Ed. Note!—For other cases, see Pleading, Cent. Dig. § 969; Dec. Dig. § 318.*]
2. Pleading (§ 318*)—Bill of Particulars.
A bill of particulars as to a defense will not be ordered, when the answer consists simply of denials of plaintiff’s allegations of ownership of the bond and mortgage sued on.
[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Pleading, Cent. Dig. § 969; Dec. Dig. § 318.*]
p. 677
Action by one Heilperin against one Levy.
Motion for a bill of particulars denied.
J. A. Seidman, for plaintiff.
Arnstein & Levy, for defendant.

Particulars of the defense of payment cannot be ordered. Barone v. O’Leary, 44 App. Div. 418 , 60 N. Y. Supp. 1131 . As to the other matters, the allegations are merely in effect denials of plaintiff’s allegations of ownership of the bond and mortgage referred to in the complaint. Particulars will not be ordered when the answer is merely a refutation of plaintiff’s assertions, nor will a party be required to disclose his evidence. Smith v. Anderson, 126 App. Div. 24 , 110 N. Y. Supp. 191 . In a proper case, a copy of an instrument will be ordered to be given; but this is not such a case.

Motion denied.