Argued March 9, 1915
Decided March 23, 1915
George M. Pinney and Fred. W. Nellis for appellant.
Frank H. Innes for respondent.
Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.
Concur: WILLARD BARTLETT, Ch. J., HISCOCK, CHASE, CUDDEBACK, HOGAN, MILLER and SEABURY, JJ.
Full title:JAMES E. MULLIGAN, Respondent, v . GEORGE SINSKI, as Executor of MARY…
Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Date published: Mar 23, 1915
Reverting to the statute as it now stands (Civ. Prac. Act, § 354), we find that it provides: "But a physician…
Tinney v. Neilson's Flowers, Inc.s that, as to "information which would tend to disgrace the memory of the decedent", there can be neither an…