Case Name: CANONICO v. CUNARD S. S. CO.
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Term
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1905-12-21
Citations: 96 N.Y.S. 499
Docket Number: 
Parties: CANONICO v. CUNARD S. S. CO.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's New York Supplement
Volume: 96
Pages: 499–500

Head Matter:
(49 Misc. Rep. 92)
CANONICO v. CUNARD S. S. CO.
(Supreme Court, Appellate Term.
December 21, 1905.)
Pleading—Bill of Particulars—Affidavit.
Where, in .an action against a steamship company by a passenger to recover for loss of a trunk delivered into defendant’s custody in Naples, defendant applied for a bill of particulars on the affidavit of one of its local attorneys, who asserted the practice of defendant abroad and its ignorance of certain things, supplemented by the affidavit of defendant’s local agent deposing to the same effect, but neither affiant showed that he knew anything about the matter, had ever been abroad, or had been afforded an opportunity to become acquainted with defendant’s business or practice in foreign ports, the affidavits were insufficient.
[Ed. Note.—For cases in point, see vol. 39, Cent. Dig. Pleading, § 978.J
Scott, P. J., dissenting.
Appeal from City Court of New York, Special Term.
Action by Errico Canónico against the Cunard Steamship Company. From an order of the New York City Court denying defendant’s motion for a bill of particulars, it appeals.
Affirmed.
Argued before SCOTT, P. J., and BISCHOFF and MacLEAN, JJ.
Lord, Day & Lord (Darius E. Peck, of counsel), for appellant.
Rosario Maggio, for respondent.
Rehearing granted, order reversed, and case remitted for determination on merits.

Opinion:
MacLEAN, J.
In an action by a passenger to recover for loss through nondelivery of a trunk given into defendant company's custody, in Naples, the defendant applied for a bill of particulars upon the affidavit of one of its local attorneys, who asserted the practice of the client abroad and its ignorance of certain things, without showing he knew anything about the matter, or had even been abroad. This was supplemented later by an affidavit of the local agent, who deposed to the same effect perfunctorily, without intimating any acquaintance, or opportunity to become acquainted, with the company's business or practice in foreign ports. With captains and stewards and baggage masters and the whole array of shipmen coming and going upon the company's steamers, plying to this port during all the months, almost a year and a half, while this action was not merely at issue but even upon the calendar, surely persons a plenty might have been found who could depose from actual knowledge of the conditions and practice—if material—at the Neapolitan dock, not unlikely, too, of the very occurrences while the Slavonia lay abreast, and so to supply sufficient papers for the application rightly denied by the learned justice because of its insufficiency.
The order should be affirmed.
Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements.
BISCHOFF, J, concurs.