AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes

TETRAD COMPANY, INC., Respondent, v. WALTER ROSCH et al., Appellants.

In an action for an injunction and an accounting based upon the alleged appropriation of plaintiff's trade secrets, defendants appeal from two resettled orders of the Supreme Court, Special Term, Kings County, dated November 24, 1961. One of such orders granted plaintiff's motion to vacate defendants' notice of their continuation of plaintiff's examination before trial. The other of such orders denied defendants' cross motion to direct plaintiff to appear for the continuation of its examination before trial and to require it to serve a further bill of particulars. Defendants also appeal from the original orders of said court, dated July 25, 1961. Resettled orders of November 24, 1961 affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. In our opinion, upon this record it may not be said that the Special Term improvidently exercised its discretion. Appeal from the original orders of July 25, 1961 dismissed, without costs, as academic. These orders were superseded by the resettled orders. Beldock, P.J., Ughetta, Kleinfeld, Christ and Hopkins, JJ., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

TETRAD COMPANY, INC. v. ROSCH
(Mar 5, 1962)