
    Maude I. Harding, Respondent, v. Charles E. Harding, Appellant.
    
      Husband and wife — ■practice — action to set aside separation agreement — when examination of defendant before trial may not be limited as to income and property to period at which agreement was made. Harding v. Harding, 203 App. Div. 721, affirmed.
    (Argued April 16, 1923;
    decided May 1, 1923.)
    Appeal, by permission, from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the fourth judicial department, entered December 23, 1922, which reversed an order of Special Term limiting the scope of an examination of the defendant before trial in an action to cancel and set aside a separation agreement entered into by husband and wife. The order of Special Term limited the examination of the defendant as to his income and property to a period immediately preceding the date on which the agreement was made. The following question was certified: “ Under the allegations of the complaint and answer in this case, is the evidence of defendant’s income and property during the years 1915, 1916, 1917, 1918, 1919, 1920, 1921 and 1922 relevant, material and proper? ”
    
      Edward L. Robertson for appellant.
    
      Albert C. Roihwell for respondent.
   Order affirmed, with costs; question certified answered in the affirmative; no opinion.

Concur: Hogan, Cardozo, Pound and Crane, JJ. Dissenting: • Hiscock, Ch. J., McLaughlin and Andrews, JJ.  