From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Andersen v. Cornell University

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Mar 14, 1996
225 A.D.2d 946 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)

Opinion

March 14, 1996

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Tompkins County (Rumsey, J.).


Plaintiff brought this personal injury action for assault, battery and negligence seeking damages which she claims to have sustained in September 1992 as the result of an alleged rape perpetrated by defendant Michael O'Gorman at a house leased to defendant Zeta Psi Fraternity by defendant Cornell University. In the course of her examination before trial, plaintiff, upon advice of counsel, refused to answer questions regarding the identities of persons with whom she had engaged in sexual intercourse both before and after the alleged rape, including the specific sexual positions she had assumed during these encounters. Defendants then made a motion before Supreme Court for an order compelling plaintiff to answer these questions. Supreme Court ruled that plaintiff would not be compelled to answer any questions regarding whether she had ever had sexual relations with certain individuals named in the questions at issue and that she would not be required to identify by name any other sexual partners or to describe her relationship with them. Defendants appeal.

This appeal must be dismissed on the ground that Supreme Court's order is not appealable as of right. Orders which determine the scope of questions for which answers will be compelled at an examination before trial may not be appealed without leave of this Court ( see, Pinkans v Hulett, 156 A.D.2d 877, 878; Matter of Beeman, 108 A.D.2d 1010, 1011).

Even if this Court were to grant defendants leave to appeal from Supreme Court's order, we would affirm it. The determination of matters relating to disclosure lies within the discretion of the court at nisi prius as it is in "the best position to determine what is material and necessary" ( Jackson v Dow Chem. Co., 214 A.D.2d 827, 828). We find no abuse of Supreme Court's discretion here ( see, Grems v City of Oneida, 206 A.D.2d 732; Mead v Benjamin, 201 A.D.2d 796; Blank v Schafrann, 180 A.D.2d 886).

Mikoll, J.P., Crew III, White and Casey, JJ., concur. Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, with costs.


Summaries of

Andersen v. Cornell University

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Mar 14, 1996
225 A.D.2d 946 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
Case details for

Andersen v. Cornell University

Case Details

Full title:ERICA K. ANDERSEN, Respondent, v. CORNELL UNIVERSITY et al., Appellants

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

Date published: Mar 14, 1996

Citations

225 A.D.2d 946 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
638 N.Y.S.2d 852

Citing Cases

State v. David A. Brogno, M.D., Alfred Becker, M.D., Albert H. Zucker, M.D., Richard L. Roth, M.D. Seymour H. Lutwak, M.D., Hudson Heart Assocs., PC

1. The Palpably Improper Question. A witness need not answer deposition questions that are so improper that…

State v. Brogno

1. The Palpably Improper Question. A witness need not answer deposition questions that are so improper that…