Opinion
July 16, 1993
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Onondaga County, Aronson, J.H.O.
Present — Denman, P.J., Pine, Balio, Doerr and Davis, JJ.
Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Generally, an expert may be retained by only one side and an adversary should not seek his opponent's expert. The rationale for the rule is to avoid placing the expert in the unethical position of accepting retainers from both sides (see, Young v Strong, 118 A.D.2d 974, 976; Byczek v. City of New York Dept. of Parks, 81 A.D.2d 823, 824; Gnoj v. City of New York, 29 A.D.2d 404, 407; Gugliano v. Levi, 24 A.D.2d 591). We conclude that the brief contact in 1984 between the County of Onondaga and the appraiser for Niagara Frontier Services, Inc., was insufficient to invoke the general rule (see, Napolitano v. Grable Co., 116 Misc.2d 58).