From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Troup v. Midland-Ross Corporation

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
May 25, 1983
94 A.D.2d 949 (N.Y. App. Div. 1983)

Opinion

May 25, 1983

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Erie County, Bayger, J.

Present — Doerr, J.P., Denman, Boomer, Green and Schnepp, JJ.


Order unanimously affirmed, with costs. Memorandum: The statements of third-party defendant's employees enjoyed a qualified privilege as material prepared for litigation (CPLR 3101, subd [d]; Shiu Yu Liang v Bateman, 68 A.D.2d 934). Nevertheless, once they were released to third-party defendant Bethlehem pursuant to CPLR 3101 (subd [e]), the liberal disclosure policy underlying CPLR 3101 required full disclosure in this multiparty action (see Siegel, Supplementary Practice Commentaries, McKinney's Cons Laws of NY, Book 7B, CPLR C3101:13, 1982-1983 Pocket Part, pp 24-25).


Summaries of

Troup v. Midland-Ross Corporation

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
May 25, 1983
94 A.D.2d 949 (N.Y. App. Div. 1983)
Case details for

Troup v. Midland-Ross Corporation

Case Details

Full title:JOHN S. TROUP et al., Plaintiffs, v. MIDLAND-ROSS CORPORATION, Respondent…

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

Date published: May 25, 1983

Citations

94 A.D.2d 949 (N.Y. App. Div. 1983)

Citing Cases

Sands v. News Am. Publ'g Inc.

While a different situation may prevail in the case of other types of newsgatherers or communicators, it can…