Case Name: PUNIE et al. v. BUFFALO GERMAN INS. CO.
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Term
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1911-12-11
Citations: 132 N.Y.S. 391
Docket Number: 
Parties: PUNIE et al. v. BUFFALO GERMAN INS. CO.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's New York Supplement
Volume: 132
Pages: 391–392

Head Matter:
PUNIE et al. v. BUFFALO GERMAN INS. CO.
(Supreme Court, Appellate Term.
December 11, 1911.)
Pleading (§ 317*) — Bill of Particulars.
Where, in an action on a policy, plaintiffs alleged notice and proof of loss given to defendant, defendant was entitled to a bill of particulars alleging the name or names of defendant’s officers, agents, or employes to whom the notice was given, and the time and place where it was given, and also the name or names of the officers, agents, or employés to whom the proof of loss was rendered, and the time and place where the same was given.
[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Pleading, Cent. Dig. §§ 954-962; Dec. Dig. § 317.*]
Appeal from City Court of New York, Special Term.
Action by Isidore Punie and another against the Buffalo German Insurance Company of Buffalo, N. Y. From so much of an order of the City Court of the City of New York as denies defendant’s motion for bill of particulars in certain respects, it appeals. Modified and affirmed.
Argued before SEABURY, LEHMAN, and PAGE, JJ.
Fixman, Lewis & Seligsberg (Clarence M. Lewis, of counsel), for appellant.
Moos, Prince & Nathan (Alfred B. Nathan and Sidney J. Loeb, of counsel), for respondents.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
The defendant in this case is entitled to a bill of particulars setting forth the name or names of the officers, agents, or employés of the defendant to whom plaintiffs allege they gave the notice referred to in paragraph 6 of the complaint, and the time when and the place where the said notice is alleged to have been given; also the name or names of the officers, agents or employés of the defendant to whom proofs of loss are alleged to have been rendered, and the time when and the place where the said proofs of loss are alleged to have been rendered. It is not entitled to the other particulars demanded by it.
The order should be modified accordingly, and, as modified, affirmed, wthout costs on this appeal.