From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Uvaydova v. New York Telephone Company

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 22, 1996
226 A.D.2d 626 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)

Opinion

April 22, 1996

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Price, J.).


Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The court properly denied the plaintiff's motion to compel the City of New York to produce an additional witness for a deposition. "In order to show that additional depositions are necessary, the moving party must show (1) that the representatives already deposed had insufficient knowledge, or were otherwise inadequate, and (2) there is a substantial likelihood that the persons sought for depositions possess information which is material and necessary to the prosecution of the case" ( Zollner v. City of New York, 204 A.D.2d 626, 627). The plaintiff failed to establish either one of the foregoing elements. Rosenblatt, J.P., Sullivan, Copertino, Santucci and Goldstein, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Uvaydova v. New York Telephone Company

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 22, 1996
226 A.D.2d 626 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
Case details for

Uvaydova v. New York Telephone Company

Case Details

Full title:LYUDMILA UVAYDOVA, Appellant, v. NEW YORK TELEPHONE COMPANY et al.…

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

Date published: Apr 22, 1996

Citations

226 A.D.2d 626 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
641 N.Y.S.2d 565

Citing Cases

Saxe v. City of New York

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with one bill of costs to the respondents…

Nazario v. City of New York

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs. To show that additional examinations…