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

HARRY WAX et al., Appellants, v. REUBEN R. SACKS et al., Respondents.

In an action for slander, plaintiffs appeal from an order directing the examination, by defendants, of a witness. Order reversed on the law and the facts, with $10 costs and disbursements, and motion to vacate the notice of examination granted, with $10 costs. Respondents failed to show special circumstances warranting the examination of the person sought to be examined (Civ. Prac. Act, § 288). He is not a party or the agent or employee of a party to the action (Rules Civ. Prac., rule 121-a). Respondents deny they ever made to him any of the alleged scandalous statements which the plaintiffs have the burden of establishing. The examination is not sought to establish the truth of the alleged statements. (Cf. Sommers v. New York World-Telegram Corp., 279 App. Div. 937.) Nolan, P.J., Carswell, Johnston, MacCrate and Schmidt, JJ., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

WAX v. SACKS
(Sep 29, 1952)