
    CHANTRELL HARDWARE & TOOL CO. v. SILBERMAN.
    (Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department.
    April 16, 1913.)
    Pleading (§ 323*)—Bill of Particulars—Particulars of Counterclaim.
    Defendant could not be required to furnish a bill of particulars of his counterclaim before issue was joined by the service of a reply, where it did not appear that the particulars ordered were required to enable plaintiff to plead.
    [Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Pleading, Cent. Dig. §§ 976-979; Dec. Dig. § 323.]
    Appeal from City Court of New York, Special Term.
    Action by the Chantrell Hardware & Tool Company against Charles I. "Silberman. From an order directing defendant to serve a bill of particulars, he appeals. Modified and affirmed.
    Argued April term, 1913, before GUY, GERARD, and PAGE, JJ.
    Wolf & Kohn, of New York City (Charles L. Grad, of New York City, of counsel), for appellant.
    Roger Lewis, of New York City, for respondent.
    
      
       For other eases see same topic & § number in Dec. & Am. Digs. 1907 to date, & Rep’r Indexes
    
   PER CURIAM.

In so far as the order directs the defendant to give the particulars of his counterclaim, it is premature. Issue had not been joined by the service of a reply, and it does not appear that the particulars ordered were required to enable the plaintiff to plead.

The order will therefore be modified, by striking therefrom the sixth, seventh, eighth, ninth, and tenth specifications of particulars to be given, and, as modified, affirmed, without costs.  