From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Mitchell v. County of Dutchess

Supreme Court, Dutchess County
May 7, 1971
66 Misc. 2d 522 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1971)

Opinion

May 7, 1971

Raymond M. Pezzo and Peter L. Maroulis for petitioners.

William V. Welch, County Attorney ( Joseph D. Quinn, Jr., of counsel), for respondent.


This is a special proceeding brought under article 4 of the CPLR to vacate the demand for examination served pursuant to section 50-h Gen. Mun. of the General Municipal Law. The demand states that the examination is to be held before an Assistant County Executive of Dutchess County.

Petitioners seek to vacate the demand on the ground that the county official is ineligible under CPLR 3113 (subd. [a]) to conduct the examination. The provisions of the CPLR are not applicable to this examination, which is governed by the provisions of section 50-h Gen. Mun. of the General Municipal Law. Such an examination is required to be held prior to the commencement of an action against a municipal body (cf. Waugh v. Firemen's Fund Ins. Co., 52 Misc.2d 141, 143; Berkowitz v. City of Long Beach, 33 Misc.2d 449).

Section 50-h provides in subdivision 2 that the demand "shall state the person before whom the examination is to be held". Subdivision 3 refers to the "officer or person before whom the examination is had", and such reference clearly indicates that examination before an officer of the municipal body was contemplated, if not expected, in this type of an examination (cf. Alongis v. City of New York, 54 Misc.2d 771).

Since the demand was proper, it is unnecessary to determine the other questions raised on this motion. In this connection, however, see Matter of Town of Johnstown v. City of Gloversville ( 36 A.D.2d 143).

The application is dismissed.


Summaries of

Matter of Mitchell v. County of Dutchess

Supreme Court, Dutchess County
May 7, 1971
66 Misc. 2d 522 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1971)
Case details for

Matter of Mitchell v. County of Dutchess

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of THOMAS W. MITCHELL et al., Doing Business as POUGHKEEPSIE…

Court:Supreme Court, Dutchess County

Date published: May 7, 1971

Citations

66 Misc. 2d 522 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1971)
321 N.Y.S.2d 715

Citing Cases

Matter of Murphy v. Board of Education

Order affirmed, with $50 costs and disbursements. We agree with Special Term that the provisions of the CPLR,…

Fitzgerald v. Sanitation Dist

With respect to the method of conducting oral examinations required by subdivision (1) of section 50-h Gen.…