Case Name: Raenola Sperling, Appellant, v. Inecto, Inc., Respondent. Harry Sperling, Appellant, v. Inecto, Inc., Respondent
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1933-06
Citations: 240 A.D. 717
Docket Number: 
Parties: Raenola Sperling, Appellant, v. Inecto, Inc., Respondent. Harry Sperling, Appellant, v. Inecto, Inc., Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 240
Pages: 717–718

Head Matter:
Raenola Sperling, Appellant, v. Inecto, Inc., Respondent. Harry Sperling, Appellant, v. Inecto, Inc., Respondent.

Opinion:
On reargument, the resettled order denying motion to vacate notice to examine defendant before trial, but limiting the examination to four of the items contained, in the notice, affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements to respondent; the examination to proceed on five days' notice. It not appearing that the proof required on the trial cannot be obtained otherwise, the examination of defendant is not necessary beyond the four items allowed. Lazansky, P. J., Young, Kapper, Scudder and Tompkins, JJ., concur.