Hyperlawhypertext legal database Llewellyn v. Froehlich 88 N.Y.S. 966

← Cases

Llewellyn v. Froehlich

88 N.Y.S. 966 Court N.Y. App. Term Decision date 1904-06-23 English

Delivered by MacLEAN, J.

Contents

Majority

p. 966
LLEWELLYN v. FROEHLICH.
(Supreme Court, Appellate Term.
June 23, 1904.)

Headnote

1. Pleading—Bill of Particulars—Discretion of Court.
Under Code Civ. Proc. § 531, providing that the court may direct the giving of a bill of particulars, the discretion of the court in ordering a bill of particulars to prevent needless preparation will not be interfered with on appeal.
Appeal from City Court of'New York, Special Term.
Action by William H. Llewellyn against Theodore H. Froehlich. From an order directing a bill of particulars of the counterclaim set up in the answer, defendant appeals. Affirmed.
Argued before FREEDMAN, P. J., and MacLEAN and SCOTT, JJ.
W. Benton Crisp, for appellant.
Graham McAdam, for respondent.

In his answer defendant sets up a counterclaim for th'e conversion of certain securities promised by the plaintiff to be carried for the defendant “in consideration of certain services there

p. 967
tofore rendered to the plaintiff by the defendant.” The plaintiff, having admitted the promise to carry, and set up that the consideration was merely friendship, asked an order for a bill of particulars of the certain services rendered, with values, which was granted by the learned justice, in the exercise of whose discretion, under the very comprehensive character of the language of section 531, Code Civ. Proc., to prevent needless preparation, this court will not interfere. Spitz v. Heinze, 77 App. Div. 317 , 319, 79 N. Y. Supp. 187 ; Smith v. Johnston, 22 N. Y. St. Rep. 593 , 594, 5 N. Y. Supp. 128 .

Order affirmed, with .costs and disbursements. All concur.

Cases cited