Jersey v. Glode Requa Coal & Lumber Co.
| Decision Date | 06 March 1961 |
| Parties | Richard JERSEY, Appellant, v. GLODE REQUA COAL AND LUMBER CO., Inc., Respondent. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Anthony F. Avallone, West Nyack, for appellant.
Paul J. LeVine, Spring Valley, Joseph M. Baltz, Jr., White Plains, for respondent.
Before NOLAN, P. J., and UGHETTA, KLEINFELD, CHRIST and PETTE, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
In an action by a vendee to recover damages for breach of a contract for the purchase and sale of real property and to impress a vendee's lien on the property for the amount of the deposit, in which defendant asserted a counterclaim, the plaintiff appeals: (1) from an order of the Supreme Court, Rockland County, dated January 25, 1960, which grants defendant's cross motion to the extent of directing summary judgment dismissing the complaint, and which denies plaintiff's motion to examine the defendant, by its agent and attorney Paul J. LeVine, and to compel defendant to produce certain documents for plaintiff's discovery and inspection; (2) from an order of said court, dated January 18, 1960, which grants plaintiff's motion for reargument of said cross motion and motion, and which on reargument adheres to the original decision granting defendant's cross motion to the extent indicated and denying plaintiff's motion; and (3) from the judgment of said court, dated January 26, 1960, entered upon such orders.
Appeal from order, dated January 25, 1960, dismissed. Said order is academic since it was superseded by the order granting reargument.
Order, dated January 18, 1960, made upon reargument, insofar as it adheres to the original decision and grants defendant's cross motion for summary judgment and denies plaintiff's motion for an examination before trial and for a discovery and inspection, reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements; judgment vacated; defendant's cross motion for summary judgment denied; plaintiff's motion to examine before trial the defendant through its agent and attorney Paul J. LeVine, and to compel defendant to produce certain documents for plaintiff's discovery and inspection, remitted to the Special Term for its consideration and disposition; and defendant's cross motion, insofar as it sought to suppress the deposition of its president heretofore taken on its examination before trial by the plaintiff, also remitted to the Special Term for its consideration and disposition.
The Special Term, in view of its granting...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Ace Hoeffner Contracting Co., Inc. v. P. J. Panzcka, Inc.
...of the affirmative defense or the counterclaim. (Re Caldwell, 186 Misc. 60, 58 N.Y.S.2d 133). In Jersey v. Glode Requa Coal and Lumber Co., Inc., 13 A.D.2d 507, 212 N.Y.S.2d 177 (2nd Dept.) while refusing to decide whether or not, by reason of a prior preclusion order, a plaintiff would be ......
-
Jawitz v. British Leyland Motor Inc.
...v. Peters, 33 A.D.2d 1096, 308 N.Y.S.2d 258; Cf. Moskowitz v. Garlock, 23 A.D.2d 943, 259 N.Y.S.2d 1003; Jersey v. Globe Requa Coal & Lumber Co., 13 A.D.2d 507, 212 N.Y.S.2d 177.) We believe that under the unique facts and circumstances here present summary judgment should be granted. The c......
- Travelers Indem. Co., Application of
-
Vandoros v. Kovacevic
...308 N.Y.S.2d 258). The Second and Third Departments have apparently not established any rule as yet. In Jersey v. Glode Requa Coal and Lumber Co., 13 A.D.2d 507, 212 N.Y.S.2d 177, the Second Department denied summary judgment because it could not be said, upon that record, that plaintiff wa......