From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Gormel v. Pfuntner Sales and Service, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jun 30, 1966
26 A.D.2d 612 (N.Y. App. Div. 1966)

Opinion

June 30, 1966

Appeal from the Livingston Special Term.

Present — Williams, P.J., Bastow, Goldman, Del Vecchio and Marsh, JJ.


Order unanimously modified in accordance with the memorandum and as modified affirmed, without costs of this appeal to any party. Memorandum: Disclosure procedures in this action were initiated by plaintiff who served notices of examination before trial of defendants prior to defendants' notices for discovery and inspection of the automobile manufactured and sold by defendants which was the alleged cause of plaintiff's injuries. No special circumstances appear which justify the order of Special Term depriving plaintiff of the priority of disclosure, which would normally accrue to him, and delaying examination of defendants until completion of the discovery and inspection. The examinations of defendants Pfuntner Sales Service, Inc. and MG Car Company, Ltd., should precede and be completed before the automobile is inspected by these defendants. ( Pakter v. Lilly Co., 19 A.D.2d 810.)


Summaries of

Gormel v. Pfuntner Sales and Service, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jun 30, 1966
26 A.D.2d 612 (N.Y. App. Div. 1966)
Case details for

Gormel v. Pfuntner Sales and Service, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:EDWARD A. GORMEL, Appellant, v. PFUNTNER SALES AND SERVICE, INC., et al.…

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

Date published: Jun 30, 1966

Citations

26 A.D.2d 612 (N.Y. App. Div. 1966)

Citing Cases

Klevens Construction Co. v. State

However, outside of the special priority in favor of defendant under CPLR 3106 (subd [a]), the normal rule is…