TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Browning, King & Co. v. O'Brien

Browning, King & Co. v. O'Brien, 137 N.Y.S. 697 (1912)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · State Appellate Courts
Decided
October 23, 1912
Judges
Guy
Citations
137 N.Y.S. 697
Disposition
Reversed, and motion granted.
Headnotes
Discovery (§ 73*)—Examination Before Trial—Scope. In an action for goods sold and delivered, it was error to limit the scope of defendant’s examination before trial to the sole question of a delivery of the goods, and excluding examination as to the sale and any promise to pay for them. [Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Discovery, Gent. Dig. § 88; Dec. Dig. § 73.*] ♦For other cases see same topic & § number in Dec. & Am. Digs. 1907 to date, & Rep’r Indexes
Summary
Appeal from City Court of New York, Special Term. Action by Browning, King & Co. against Mary A. O’Brien. From an order denying a motion to vacate an order limiting the scope of defendant’s examination before trial, plaintiff appeals.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Guy

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

GUY, J.

This action was brought to recover for goods sold and delivered. The defense is a general denial.

[1] Plaintiff obtained an order to examine defendant upon all the issues raised by the pleadings. Upon the return day the court limited the examination to the delivery only of the goods, excluding all examination as to the sale and as to any promise to pay for the goods.

To limit the examination in an action for goods sold and delivered to the naked question of the delivery of the goods renders it futile.

Order reversed and motion granted, with $10 costs and disbursements of appeal. All concur.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 0 cases

No case in this database cites this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list