
    UNITED STATES ASPHALT REFINING CO. v. TEXAS CO.
    (No. 6356.)
    (Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.
    November 6 1914.)
    Appeal from Special Term, New ±ork County. Action by the United States Asphalt Refining Company against the Texas Company. From a Special Term order granting a motion for a bill of particulars of the reply to defendant's counterclaiui, plaintiff appeals. Modified and affirmed. See, also, 149 N. Y. Supp. 1115. Jacob Newman, of, New York Cit~y (Nathan Ballin, of New York City, of counsel), for appellant. Guy Stevens, of New York City, and James L. Nesbitt, of Brooklyn, for respondent.
   P]PR CURIAM.

There seems to be no necessity or propriety in requiring particulars called for by the following paragraphs of the affidavit upon which granted: As to the defense to the first counterclaim, Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 12, 13, 14, and 15. As to the defense to the second coulaterclaim, paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4. The order appealed from should therefore be modified, so as to grant the motion for the bill of particulars, eicept in respect to the clauses hereinbefore enumerated, and, as so modified, affirmed, without costs.  