From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Scott v. Albord

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 17, 2001
289 A.D.2d 389 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)

Opinion

2001-03937

Submitted November 28, 2001.

December 17, 2001.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendant appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Pincus, J.), dated March 21, 2001, as granted his motion to compel disclosure of the injured plaintiff's no-fault records only to the extent of compelling disclosure of the records concerning "the history of the occurrence of the accident", and conditionally granted the plaintiffs' cross motion to strike his answer unless he appeared for an examination before trial on a certain date.

Sobel, Ross, Fliegel Suss, New York, N.Y. (Slavko Ristich of counsel), for appellant.

Kagan Gertel, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Irving Gertel of counsel), for respondents.

Before: CORNELIUS J. O'BRIEN, J.P., SONDRA MILLER, LEO F. McGINITY, ROBERT W. SCHMIDT, SANDRA L. TOWNES, JJ.


ORDERED that the order is modified by deleting the provision thereof granting the motion only to the extent of compelling disclosure of the injured plaintiff's no-fault records concerning "the history of the occurrence of the accident" and substituting therefor a provision granting the motion in its entirety; as so modified, the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

Since the injured plaintiff's no-fault records are material and necessary to the defense of this action, the defendant is entitled to full disclosure of those records (see, Allen v. Crowell-Collier Pub. Co., 21 N.Y.2d 403, 408; Hinrichs v. Tonnssen, 128 Misc.2d 196). Therefore, the defendant's motion to compel disclosure of those records should have been granted in its entirety.

The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in conditionally granting the plaintiffs' cross motion to strike the defendant's answer unless he appeared for an examination before trial on a certain date (see, Torres v. Martinez, 250 A.D.2d 759).

O'BRIEN, J.P., S. MILLER, McGINITY, SCHMIDT and TOWNES, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Scott v. Albord

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 17, 2001
289 A.D.2d 389 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
Case details for

Scott v. Albord

Case Details

Full title:CYRA SCOTT, et al., respondents, v. YVES SAINT ALBORD, appellant

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

Date published: Dec 17, 2001

Citations

289 A.D.2d 389 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
734 N.Y.S.2d 623

Citing Cases

Vinings Spinal v. Progressive

The defendant concluded that these tests were medically not necessary and consequently refused to reimburse…

Brown v. City of New York

Coello asserts that his physical or mental condition is not in controversy and, in any event, the records…