From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Fitzgerald v. Fitzgerald

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 2, 1941
262 App. Div. 708 (N.Y. App. Div. 1941)

Opinion

May 2, 1941.

Present — Martin, P.J., O'Malley, Townley, Dore and Callahan, JJ.; O'Malley, J., concurs. (See Probst v. Frenkel, 240 App. Div. 504. ) Settle order on notice.


Order unanimously modified by providing that the examination of defendant upon the matters set forth in plaintiff's notice of motion be held in the State of California upon written interrogatories, as provided in section 302 of the Civil Practice Act, and the Rules of Civil Practice applicable to such examinations. In the alternative, if plaintiff so prefers, the testimony may be taken in California upon open commission. In the latter event the necessary disbursements of the attorneys for both sides in attending upon the examination shall be paid by their respective clients. The party ultimately successful in the action may tax such payments as a disbursement. Otherwise, order affirmed. Bill of particulars to be served within twenty days after service of order to be entered hereon. No opinion.


Summaries of

Fitzgerald v. Fitzgerald

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 2, 1941
262 App. Div. 708 (N.Y. App. Div. 1941)
Case details for

Fitzgerald v. Fitzgerald

Case Details

Full title:MARGUERITE FITZGERALD, Respondent, v. LEO FITZGERALD, Appellant

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

Date published: May 2, 1941

Citations

262 App. Div. 708 (N.Y. App. Div. 1941)

Citing Cases

Walborsky v. Wolf

In either event, the expense incurred is to be taxed as a disbursement by the party ultimately succeeding in…

Matter of Russell

The court is of the opinion that here it would be unfair to burden the petitioner with the entire cost of the…