From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Galdon v. Ring

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
May 7, 1999
261 A.D.2d 928 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)

Opinion

May 7, 1999

Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Cosgrove, J. — Discovery.

Present — Pine, J. P., Hayes, Pigott, Jr., Scudder and Balio, JJ.


Order unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: Defendants contend that they are entitled to discover the identity of the treating physician of plaintiff Frances L. Galdon even though that physician will also serve as her expert witness in her medical malpractice trial against defendants. We disagree. Supreme Court properly permitted plaintiffs to serve redacted copies of medical records and reports omitting the name and address of that physician and the name of the hospital. The redaction was "an appropriate accommodation of the competing purposes of broad disclosure under CPLR 3121 (b) and protection of the expert's identity under CPLR 3101 (d) (1) (i)" ( Wagner v. Kingston Hosp., 182 A.D.2d 616, 617; see, Ryan v. Michelsen, 241 A.D.2d 434, 436; see also, Napierski v. Finn, 229 A.D.2d 869, 870-871).


Summaries of

Galdon v. Ring

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
May 7, 1999
261 A.D.2d 928 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
Case details for

Galdon v. Ring

Case Details

Full title:FRANCES L. GALDON et al., Respondents, v. JOHN H. RING, JR., et al.…

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

Date published: May 7, 1999

Citations

261 A.D.2d 928 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
690 N.Y.S.2d 794

Citing Cases

Grisanti v. Kurss

Here, the Court sees no plausible alternative to characterizing the examining neurologist as anything other…

Grisanti v. Kurss

Here, the Court sees no plausible alternative to characterizing the examining neurologist as anything other…