From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Padro v. Pfizer, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Feb 3, 2000
269 A.D.2d 129 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)

Opinion

February 3, 2000

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Louis York, J.), entered June 22, 1999, which granted defendant's motion pursuant to CPLR 3101(d)(1)(iii) for leave to depose plaintiff's expert and order, same court and Justice, entered September 8, 1999, which insofar as it adhered to its prior decision, and granted defendant's motion to preclude plaintiff's expert from testifying at trial unless he appeared for deposition on a specified date, unanimously reversed, on the law, the facts, and in the exercise of discretion, without costs, and the motions denied.

Ronald R. Benjamin, for plaintiff-appellant.

Steven Glickstein, for defendant-respondent.

SULLIVAN, J.P., NARDELLI, RUBIN, ANDRIAS, FRIEDMAN, JJ.


Contrary to the conclusion reached by Supreme Court, defendant failed to demonstrate special circumstances justifying a pretrial deposition of plaintiff's expert (CPLR 3101 [d][1][iii]). In this regard, neither the purported novelty of the opinion expressed in plaintiff's expert disclosure notice, nor the claimed flaws underlying the expert's opinion rise to the level of special circumstances (see, Hallahan v. Ashland Chemical Co., 237 A.D.2d 697;Rosario v. General Motors Corp., 148 A.D.2d 108).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.


Summaries of

Padro v. Pfizer, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Feb 3, 2000
269 A.D.2d 129 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
Case details for

Padro v. Pfizer, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:DIEGO PADRO, Plaintiff-Appellant, MARIA PADRO, Plaintiff v. PFIZER, INC.…

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

Date published: Feb 3, 2000

Citations

269 A.D.2d 129 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
701 N.Y.S.2d 898

Citing Cases

Lazzari v. Qualcon Constr., LLC

The loss or absence of Dr. Moore's treatment records may constitute a special circumstance warranting…

C v. St. Luke's-Roosevelt Hospital Center

If this court held a Frye hearing before trial, St. Luke's would have an opportunity to thoroughly question…