Case ID: nys_92/html/0282-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

FRANKEL v. KELLER PRINTING CO.
    (Supreme Court, Appellate Term.
    February 23, 1905.)
    Bills of Particulars—Affidavit—Failure to Answer.
    Where the affidavit for a bill of particulars is sufficient, and is not disputed by answering affidavits, the bill of particulars must be ordered.
    Appeal from City Court of New York, Special Term.
    Action by Justus Frankel against the Keller Printing Company. From an order denying a motion for a bill of particulars, defendant appeals. Reversed.
    Argued before SCOTT, GIEGERICH, and McCALL, JJ.
    F. Solinger, for appellant.
    A. Byrne, for respondent.
   PER CURIAM.

Based upon an affidavit full and complete, specifying, among other things, that the defendant cannot safely proceed to trial without the particulars asked for, a motion was made for a bill of particulars in this action. This affidavit was not disputed, the plaintiff submitting no answering affidavits. In view of the undisputed allegation set forth in said affidavit showing a proper case for the ordering of a bill of particulars, the order herein should be reversed.

Order reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements.