From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Sorrentino v. Rowntree

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 17, 1947
272 App. Div. 881 (N.Y. App. Div. 1947)

Opinion

June 17, 1947.

Present — Glennon, Dore, Cohn, Peck and Van Voorhis, JJ.


Plaintiff's objections to items 3 and 6 in the demand for bill of particulars should have been made by motion to modify the demand and should not have awaited a motion to preclude. We are not satisfied that plaintiff's delay in complying with the demand has been altogether excusable, but we think under all the circumstances that the order of preclusion was not provident. The order appealed from is unanimously reversed, without costs, on condition that plaintiff serve his bill of particulars within ten days from the entry of the order hereon; otherwise the order is affirmed. Settle order on notice.


Summaries of

Sorrentino v. Rowntree

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 17, 1947
272 App. Div. 881 (N.Y. App. Div. 1947)
Case details for

Sorrentino v. Rowntree

Case Details

Full title:LOUIS SORRENTINO, Appellant, v. CARLISLE ROWNTREE, Respondent, et al.…

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

Date published: Jun 17, 1947

Citations

272 App. Div. 881 (N.Y. App. Div. 1947)