Case Name: Louise McGowan, Respondent, v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, Appellant
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1932-07-19
Citations: 259 N.Y. 454
Docket Number: 
Parties: Louise McGowan, Respondent, v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Reports
Volume: 259
Pages: 454–456

Head Matter:
Louise McGowan, Respondent, v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, Appellant.
(Argued June 2, 1932;
decided July 19, 1932.)
Frederick C. Tanner, Leroy A. Lincoln and Dean Potter for appellant.
Nathaniel Ellenbogen for respondent.
Arthur J. W. Hilly, Corporation Counsel (J. Joseph Lilly and Milton I. Hauser of counsel), for Department of Health of City of New York.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
This is an appeal by the defendant from an order of the Appellate Division as provided by subdivision 4 of section 588 of the Civil Practice Act. A question certified to this court as therein provided must be in such form that it may be answered " yes " or " no." If a question is certified " in such broad and indefinite terms that it will admit of one answer under one set of circumstances, and a different answer under another " the court will decline to answer it. (Grannan v. Westchester Racing Assn., 153 N. Y. 449, 458.) The question certified reads: "Are the records of the Department of Health of the City of New York, relating to the attendance and treatment of a patient at a hospital or clinic conducted by such Department, subject to subpoena duces tecum, for production on the trial of a pending action, on application under Rule 162 of the Rules of Civil Practice? " Manifestly the question cannot be answered either in the affirmative or negative.
The appeal should be dismissed, with costs.
Pound, Ch. J., Crane, Lehman, Kellogg, O'Brien, Hubbs and Crouch, JJ., concur.
Appeal dismissed.