Hyperlawhypertext legal database Videtto v. Dudley 56 N.Y. Super. Ct. 600

← Cases

Videtto v. Dudley

56 N.Y. Super. Ct. 600 24 Jones & S. 600 Court N.Y. Super. Ct. Decision date 1889-03-05 English

Delivered by The Court (Truax, J., writing and Sedgwick, Ch. J., concurring)

Contents

Concurrence

p. 600
GEORGE W. VIDETTO, Appellant v. FRANCIS D. DUDLEY, Respondent.

Headnote

Examination of party after issue and before trial, allegations not necessary in moving papers.
Before Sedgwick, Ch. J., and Truax, J.
Decided March 5, 1889.
Appeal from an order, vacating an order for the examination of the defendant as a party before trial.
David Keane, attorney and of counsel for appellant.
Friend & House, attorneys and of counsel for respondent.

held “ that it was not necessary to allege in the moving papers that there were no other witnesses by whom he could establish the facts sought to be proved by the party; that the Code did not require such an allegation; "that the moving party has a right if he sees fit to call his adversary to prove his case; ” also held “ that an allegation that the action is brought

p. 601
to recover damages for a personal injury resulting from defendant’s negligence was a sufficient statement of the nature of the action.” The order was reversed.