Case ID: nys_24/html/0583-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "DYKMAN, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

BAAS v. PAIN.
    (Supreme Court, General Term, Second Department.
    July 28, 1893.)
    Examination of Defendant before Trial—When Permissible.
    A defendant who Is connected with a firm against which plaintiff has a demand may be examined before trial in regard to its composition, in order to ascertain the proper parties defendant to substitute for those designated as John Doe.
    Appeal from special term, Kings county.
    Action by Helena Baas against James Pain, Henry J. Pain, and John Doe for personal injuries received from a display of fire works made by “James Pain & Sons, London, England, represented by Henry J. Pain.” The action was commenced by service of summons and a complaint on Henry J. Pain. The complaint alleged that a copartnership existed between defendants, which was denied in the answer. From an order for the examination of defendant Henry J. Pain before trial, to ascertain who are the proper parties defendant to substitute for those designated as John Doe, defendant Henry J. Pain appeals.
    Affirmed.
    Argued before BARNARD, P. J., and DYKMAN, J.
    William S. Cogswell, for appellant.
    Hector M. Hitchings, for respondent.
   DYKMAN, J.

This is an appeal from an order for the examination of the defendant Henry J. Pain as a party defendant to ascertain the composition of James Pain & Sons, to the end that the plaintiff may determine the names of the persons who should be made parties defendant in an amended complaint, which is rendered necessary by the answer of the defendants. We think the order was properly made, and should be affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements.