
    First Department,
    November, 1926.
    Heit & Weisenthal, Inc., Appellant, v. Gustave Light, Respondent. Heit & Weisenthal, Appellant, v. Sam Light, Respondent. Louis Miller, Appellant, v. Gustave Light, Respondent. Louis Miller, Appellant, v. Sam Light, Respondent.
    Isidor Stein and Another, Copartners Doing Business under the Firm Name of and as Stein & Cooperman, Appellants, v. Gustave Light, Respondent,
    Isidor Stein and Another, Copartners Doing Business under the Firm Name of and as Stein & Cooperman, Appellants, y. Sam Light, Respondent.
    
      Depositions — examination of defendants before trial — notice of examination should not be vacated on ground that it might tend to incriminate defendants — right to refuse to incriminate oneself is personal and can be claimed only on examination.
    
    Appeals from orders of the Supreme Court, made at the New York Special Term and entered in the New York county clerk’s office on May 19, 1925, granting defendants’ motions to vacate plaintiffs’ notices for examination of defendants before trial.
   Per Curiam.

This court has consistently held that the claim that an examination before trial ought not to be had because it might result in compelling the witness to give evidence against himself, is not a proper ground for denying the examination. The right to refuse to incriminate oneself is a personal right and must be claimed at the time the questions are asked. (Nichoff v. Star Co., 134 App. Div. 473; Bioren v. Canadian Mines Co., 140 id. 523; Peterson v. Fowler, 143 id. 282; Ryan v. Reagan, 46 id. 590.) The orders appealed from should, therefore, be reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and the motions denied, with ten dollars costs. Present — Clarke, P. J., Dowling, Finch, MeAvoy and Martin, JJ. In each case: Order reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion denied, with ten dollars costs. The date for the examination to proceed to be fixed in the order. Settle order on notice.  