From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bruno v. Dellwood Foods, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 24, 1986
124 A.D.2d 773 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986)

Opinion

November 24, 1986

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


Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, with costs, and the plaintiff's motion is granted to the extent that the defendant is directed to comply with item No. 2 of the plaintiff's notice for discovery and inspection and to permit her to film the milk-filling process, conditioned only upon taking reasonable safety precautions. The defendant shall permit the plaintiff to make the inspection within 20 days after service upon it of a copy of this decision and order, with notice of entry. Any dispute between the parties as to the reasonable safety precautions with respect to that filming shall be submitted to and determined by the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, forthwith.

Since the defendant did not challenge the relevance of the requested inspection and, indeed, indicated it would permit the filming of the milk-filling process so long as certain safety precautions were undertaken, Special Term abused its discretion in failing to allow the filming and in vacating the plaintiff's demand therefor. Mangano, J.P., Brown, Rubin and Eiber, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Bruno v. Dellwood Foods, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 24, 1986
124 A.D.2d 773 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986)
Case details for

Bruno v. Dellwood Foods, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:DEBORAH BRUNO, Appellant, v. DELLWOOD FOODS, INC., Respondent

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

Date published: Nov 24, 1986

Citations

124 A.D.2d 773 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986)

Citing Cases

McAllister v. Transform SR Home Improvement Prod.

The Second Department holds that where the central issue in a case involves the condition of the property,…

Haddad v. Salzman

In this dispute between neighbors over whether the defendants' alterations and additions to their home are…