From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Solof v. City of New York

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department
Apr 22, 1944
181 Misc. 956 (N.Y. App. Term 1944)

Opinion

April 22, 1944.

Appeal from the City Court of New York, Kings County, SCHWARTZWALD, J.

Ignatius M. Wilkinson, Corporation Counsel ( Daniel A. Riordan of counsel), for appellant.

Isidor Neuwirth for respondent.


MEMORANDUM


Judgment unanimously reversed upon the law, and new trial granted, with costs to the defendant to abide the event.

It was error to receive in evidence in its entirety the demand for admission of facts and also the written statements of the physician and dentist. The exhibits were offered under section 322 of the Civil Practice Act as an admission of facts binding upon the defendant. The demand to admit calls for the admission of facts of a controversial nature concerning the examination and treatment of plaintiff by his own physician and dentist and the reasonable value of their services, as to the truth of which defendant had neither knowledge nor reasonable means of acquiring knowledge. Such a demand is not within the contemplation of the statute.

Concur: MacCRATE, McCOOEY and STEINBRINK, JJ.


Summaries of

Solof v. City of New York

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department
Apr 22, 1944
181 Misc. 956 (N.Y. App. Term 1944)
Case details for

Solof v. City of New York

Case Details

Full title:EUGENE V. SOLOF, Respondent, v. CITY OF NEW YORK, Appellant

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department

Date published: Apr 22, 1944

Citations

181 Misc. 956 (N.Y. App. Term 1944)
49 N.Y.S.2d 921

Citing Cases

Nader v. General Motors Corp.

Similarly, in the instant matter, the number, the detailed complexity, the minutia and, in many instances,…

Matter of Stevens

Nevertheless, in view of the inability of respondent to learn all of the facts in connection with the…