From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

McGlone v. Port Auth. of New York

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Dec 13, 2011
90 A.D.3d 479 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011)

Opinion

2011-12-13

Michael McGLONE, et al., Plaintiffs–Appellants, v. The PORT AUTHORITY OF NEW YORK AND NEW JERSEY, et al., Defendants–Respondents,Semcor Equipment and Manufacturing Corporation, Defendant.

David W. McCarthy, Woodbury, for appellants. Fabiani Cohen & Hall, LLP, New York (Michele V. Ficarra of counsel), for respondents.


David W. McCarthy, Woodbury, for appellants. Fabiani Cohen & Hall, LLP, New York (Michele V. Ficarra of counsel), for respondents.

GONZALEZ, P.J., FRIEDMAN, MOSKOWITZ, ACOSTA, RICHTER, JJ.

Orders, Supreme Court, New York County (Eileen A. Rakower, J.), entered June 10, 2011, which, in this personal injury action, to the extent appealed from, denied plaintiffs' motion to strike defendants-respondents' answer, and granted defendants' motion for discovery to the extent of requiring plaintiff Michael McGlone to provide authorizations for all of his medical records unrestricted as to date as addressed in defendants' motion, including plaintiff's medical records from his enlistment in the United States Marine Corp., unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Although defendants did not timely comply with prior court-ordered deadlines, the record supports the motion court's determination that they substantially complied with their disclosure obligations and that any failure to comply was not wilful, contumacious or in bad faith ( see Perez v. New York City Tr. Auth., 73 A.D.3d 529, 530, 901 N.Y.S.2d 38 [2010]; Banner v. New York City Hous. Auth., 73 A.D.3d 502, 503, 900 N.Y.S.2d 857 [2010] ).

The court also properly directed plaintiff to provide authorizations for all medical records unrestricted by date as sought by defendants in prior discovery requests. Plaintiff averred in his bill of particulars that the injuries he allegedly sustained as a result of the subject accident aggravated or exacerbated underlying conditions that were asymptomatic before the accident, and that he was disabled as a result. In light of his averments, plaintiff voluntarily placed his physical condition in issue; therefore, defendants are entitled to discovery to determine the extent, if any, that plaintiff's claimed injuries “are attributable to accidents other than the one at issue here” ( Rega v. Avon Prods., Inc., 49 A.D.3d 329, 330, 854 N.Y.S.2d 688 [2008]; cf. Noble v. Ackerman, 216 A.D.2d 140, 629 N.Y.S.2d 198 [1995] ).


Summaries of

McGlone v. Port Auth. of New York

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Dec 13, 2011
90 A.D.3d 479 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011)
Case details for

McGlone v. Port Auth. of New York

Case Details

Full title:Michael McGLONE, et al., Plaintiffs–Appellants, v. The PORT AUTHORITY OF…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.

Date published: Dec 13, 2011

Citations

90 A.D.3d 479 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011)
934 N.Y.S.2d 161
2011 N.Y. Slip Op. 8975

Citing Cases

St. Cloux v. Park S. Tenants Corp.

A defendant is entitled to discovery to determine the extent, if any, that plaintiff's claimed injuries and…

Rubio v. N.Y.C. Transit Auth.

The court did not err in limiting the introduction of plaintiff's medical records concerning preexisting…