From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Conforti v. Cent. Sch. Dist. No. 3 of Towns

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Dec 16, 1954
284 App. Div. 1084 (N.Y. App. Div. 1954)

Opinion

December 16, 1954.

Appeal from Supreme Court, Ulster County.

Present — Foster, P.J., Bergan, Coon, Halpern and Zeller, JJ.


Appellants urge that defendants-respondents failed to present satisfactory evidence to justify a second physical examination under section 306 of the Civil Practice Act. The infant plaintiff had voluntarily submitted to one examination. We think the moving papers set forth sufficient reasons for a second examination, and moreover the statute expresses no limitation on the number of examinations permitted. The right to permit a second examination has been recognized ( Orlando v. Syracuse R.T. Ry. Co., 109 App. Div. 356; Leas v. New York Albany Lighterage Co., 119 Misc. 323). Order unanimously affirmed, without costs.


Summaries of

Conforti v. Cent. Sch. Dist. No. 3 of Towns

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Dec 16, 1954
284 App. Div. 1084 (N.Y. App. Div. 1954)
Case details for

Conforti v. Cent. Sch. Dist. No. 3 of Towns

Case Details

Full title:JAMES CONFORTI, by His Guardian ad Litem, PATRICK CONFORTI, Appellant, et…

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

Date published: Dec 16, 1954

Citations

284 App. Div. 1084 (N.Y. App. Div. 1954)

Citing Cases

Swiatlowski v. Kasprzyk

A careful examination of the record on appeal discloses that the physician examined the plaintiff on January…

Strobel v. Dave Oil Burner Co.

Although the authorities are in conflict as to the right to direct a second physical examination where there…