Schlesinger v. Thalmessinger

<p>1. Bell of Particulars—Order after Service.</p> <p>Defendant having served a bill of particulars of his counterclaim before argument of the motion therefor, and it being retained by plaintiff, and having complied with the demand in most particulars, the order should not be that the motion be granted, but an order requiring a further bill should be made.</p> <p>2. Same—Order as to Evidence.</p> <p>An order for a bill of particulars of a counterclaim should not provide that, in default of service thereof, defendant be precluded from giving evidence of the counterclaim.</p> <p>Action by Leo Schlesinger, receiver of the Federal Bank of New York, against Meyer Thalmessinger, on notes given by defendant to the bank. Defendant counterclaimed for the reasonable value of services in furnishing the bank with the names of parties to correspond with, to induce them to become borrowers or depositors of the bank, and in giving advice and counsel to the officers of the bank, and for commissions on accounts opened with the bank through his efforts. Froman order granting plaintiff’s motion • for a.bill of particulars of the counterclaim—the order concluding that, in default of service of the bill of particulars, defendant be precluded from giving any evidence of the matters set forth in the counterclaim—defendant ap-' peals. Modified.</p>