
    YELLOW TAXICAB CO. v. GAYNOR, Mayor, et al.
    (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.
    November 28, 1913.)
    Discovery (§ 40)—Subject-Matter.
    Defendants are not entitled to a discovery relating solely to matters upon which the plaintiff has the burden of proof before he can have any relief in the action.
    [Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Discovery, Cent. Dig. §§■ 52, 53; Dec. Dig. § 40.*]
    Appeal from Special Term, New York County.
    Action by the Yellow Taxicab Company against William J. Gaynor, as Mayor of the City of New York, and others. From an order grant-. ing defendants permission to examine certain books, papers, documents, and property belonging to and in the possession of the plaintiff, plaintiff appeals.
    Reversed, and motion denied.
    See, also, 144 N. Y. Supp. 299.
    Argued before INGRAHAM, P. J., and CLARKE, SCOTT, DOW-LING, and HOTCHKISS, JJ.
    Henry Bennett Leary, of New York City, for appellant.
    Charles J. Nehbras, of New York City, for respondents.'
    
      
      For other cases see same topic & § number in Dec. & Am. Digs. 1907 to date, & Rep’r Indexes
    
   PER CURIAM.

The facts which the defendants seek to ascertain by this discovery and examination relate solely to matters upon which the plaintiff has the burden of proof before it can get any relief in this action. Lawson v. Hotchkiss, 140 App. Div. 297, 125 N. Y. Supp. 261.

The order should be reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and the motion denied, with $10 costs.  