Case Name: Fidelity and Deposit Company of Maryland, Plaintiff, v. The Public National Bank and Trust Company, Defendant. The Harriman National Bank and Trust Company and Others, Impleaded, Defendants
Court: New York Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1932-05-05
Citations: 144 Misc. 327
Docket Number: 
Parties: Fidelity and Deposit Company of Maryland, Plaintiff, v. The Public National Bank and Trust Company, Defendant. The Harriman National Bank and Trust Company and Others, Impleaded, Defendants.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Miscellaneous Reports
Volume: 144
Pages: 327–327

Head Matter:
Fidelity and Deposit Company of Maryland, Plaintiff, v. The Public National Bank and Trust Company, Defendant. The Harriman National Bank and Trust Company and Others, Impleaded, Defendants.
Supreme Court, New York County,
May 5, 1932.
Carter, Ledyard & MiTburn [.Malcom S. Me Neal Watts of counsel], for the impleaded defendant The Harriman National Bank and Trust Company, for the motion.
Thomas E. White [Frank E. Davis of counsel], for the plaintiff, opposed.

Opinion:
Frankenthaler, J.
The plaintiff is not concerned with the controversy between the original defendant and the impleaded defendant (Municipal Service Real Estate Company, Inc., v. D. B. & M. Holding Corporation, 257 N. Y. 423), and it would seem to follow that the provision of section 288 of the Civil Practice Act which permits an examination " of the original owner of a claim which constitutes, or from which arose, a cause of action acquired by the adverse party'' (Italics mine) does not authorize an examination of the plaintiff's assignors. The motion for an examination is denied.