Case ID: ny-st-rep_41/html/0435-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Van Brunt, P. J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Benjamin Lewis, Resp’t, v. The Chronicle Company, Limited, App’lt.
    
      (Supreme Court, General Term, First Department,
    
    
      Filed November 13, 1891.)
    
    'Bill of particulars—Appeal.
    An order denying a motion for a bill of particulars will not be disturbed on appeal where the record does not show that the complaint was before the court on the hearing of the motion.
    Appeal from order denying motion for a bill of particulars. Action for libel.
    
      Treadwell Cleveland, for app’lt; Tracy, MacFarland, Boardman & Platt, for resp’t.
   Van Brunt, P. J.

It does not appear from the record presented on this appeal that the complaint was before the court below at the time of the hearing of this motion. It was, therefore, impossible for it to determine whether or not the defendant was entitled to a bill of particulars; and the complaint not being-before this court upon appeal, there is nothing in this record showing that any error was committed by the court below.

The order should, therefore, be affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements.

Daniels and Ingraham, JJ., concur.