Hirsch v. Hirsch (241 A.D. 675, 1934)

Orders reversed and motion denied. As plaintiff states that he will limit his proof to one specific act alleged in paragraph 4 of the complaint, the bill ordered was unnecessary. The plaintiff will have the right to rely upon the allegations of said paragraph to prove course of conduct. (Ketcham v. Ketcham, 32 App. Div. 26; Krauss v. Krauss, 73 id. 509.) Present — Finch, P. J., Merrell, Martin, O’Malley and Untermyer, JJ.