History
  • No items yet
midpage
Rosen v. Tanowitz
272 A.D.2d 775
| N.Y. App. Div. | 1947
|
Check Treatment

In an action to recover commissions alleged to be due under contracts of employment, plaintiff appeals from an order denying his motion to examine defendant before trial. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. On consideration of plaintiff’s complaint, which consists for the most part of vague and indefinite allegations of fact and conclusions of law, and of his notice of motion and supporting affidavits, which are equally vague and indefinite as to the facts which he desires to establish, we cannot say that'the denial of plaintiff’s motion was an improper exercise of discretion. Hagarty, Acting P. J., Carswell, Adel, Nolan and Sneed, JJ., concur.

Case Details

Case Name: Rosen v. Tanowitz
Court Name: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Date Published: Apr 14, 1947
Citation: 272 A.D.2d 775
Court Abbreviation: N.Y. App. Div.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.