From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Carmody v. Kuehner

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 9, 1994
204 A.D.2d 378 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)

Opinion

May 9, 1994

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Cannavo, J.).


Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, as a matter of discretion, with costs, by (1) deleting the provision thereof which conditionally granted the appellant's motion, (2) substituting therefor a provision granting the appellant's motion without condition, (3) adding thereto a provision vacating the notice of availability for physical examination served by the plaintiffs, and (4) adding thereto a provision directing each of the two plaintiffs to submit to two physical examinations (for a total of four physical examinations) to take place at the offices of two physicians with offices in Suffolk County, chosen by the appellant, upon written notice of not less than 10 days, or at such times or places as the parties may agree.

In Resnick v. Seher ( 198 A.D.2d 218), we stated that as a general rule medical examinations conducted during the course of pretrial disclosure should take place in medical offices, which are presumably better equipped for such purposes. We viewed this proposition as a matter of "common sense" (Resnick v. Seher, supra). Where, as in the present case, the bill of particulars and the medical reports furnished by the plaintiffs reveal that the plaintiffs' own physicians have conducted a series of medical tests in their offices, any departure from this general rule would not be warranted. Thus, we conclude that the order should be reversed insofar as appealed from as an exercise of our own independent discretion, even though the Supreme Court's exercise of its discretion cannot be characterized as abuse or as erroneous as a matter of law (see, Resnick v. Seher, supra). Bracken, J.P., O'Brien, Santucci and Joy, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Carmody v. Kuehner

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 9, 1994
204 A.D.2d 378 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
Case details for

Carmody v. Kuehner

Case Details

Full title:MICHAEL CARMODY et al., Respondents, v. SOAHN KUEHNER et al., Defendants…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: May 9, 1994

Citations

204 A.D.2d 378 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
612 N.Y.S.2d 53