From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

ROUSSEAU v. ROBB, JR

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 1, 1916
175 App. Div. 949 (N.Y. App. Div. 1916)

Opinion

November, 1916.


Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. It is probable that the Special Term, exercising its discretion, was not satisfied with the sufficiency of the affidavit of defendants' attorney that the convenience of witnesses would be promoted by the granting of the motion. The deponent failed to specify the witnesses whom he had interviewed and to state the materiality of their evidence as a matter of personal knowledge. (See Pattison v. Hines, 105 App. Div. 282.) Thomas, Carr, Stapleton and Putnam, JJ., concurred; Jenks, P.J., not voting.


Summaries of

ROUSSEAU v. ROBB, JR

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 1, 1916
175 App. Div. 949 (N.Y. App. Div. 1916)
Case details for

ROUSSEAU v. ROBB, JR

Case Details

Full title:FRANCIS X. ROUSSEAU, Respondent, v. THOMAS ROBB, JR., Individually, etc.…

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

Date published: Nov 1, 1916

Citations

175 App. Div. 949 (N.Y. App. Div. 1916)