The provision thereof directing the plaintiff to provide authorizations for records related to a priorĪccident occurring in 2004, and substituting therefor a provision directing the plaintiff to provideĪuthorizations for all records arising out of a prior accident occurring on SeptemĪnd (3) deleting the provision thereof denying that branch of that defendant's motion which was Substituting therefor a provision granting those branches of that defendant's motion (2) deleting Subsequent accident in 2015 and related treatment, and a supplemental physical examination, and Plaintiff to appear for a supplemental deposition concerning only a prior accident in 2004 and a Kahn, and, upon renewal, to vacate the note of issue and direct the Provide authorizations permitting the release of medical Motion of the defendant New York City Transit Authority which were to direct the plaintiff to Ordered that the order dated March 8, 2018, is modified, on the law, the facts, and in theĮxercise of discretion, by (1) deleting the provisions thereof denying those branches of the Ordered that the order dated February 1, 2018, is affirmed insofar as appealed from and it is Lies from an order entered on the consent of the appealing party ( see CPLR 5511) and it Ordered that the appeal from the order dated November 2, 2017, is dismissed, as no appeal The order datedĪpril 12, 2018, denied that defendant's motion to preclude the plaintiff from providing anyĮvidence on damages or to vacate the note of issue and strike the case from the trial The order dated March 8, 2018, insofar as appealed from, denied those branches of thatĭefendant's motion which were pursuant to CPLR 3126 to strike the complaint, to compelĭisclosure regarding the plaintiff's alleged need for further surgery and, upon renewal of thatĭefendant's previous motion, to vacate the note of issue and direct the plaintiff to provide certainĭiscovery and to appear for a supplemental deposition and physical examination. Order dated February 1, 2018, insofar as appealed from, denied that defendant's motion to theĮxtent that the defendant sought discovery beyond that granted in the order dated November 2,Ģ017. Which were to vacate the note of issue and compel the plaintiff to provide certain discovery. November 2, 2017, insofar as appealed from, upon the stipulation of the plaintiff and theĭefendant New York City Transit Authority, denied those branches of that defendant's motion Sherman, J.) datedįebruary 1, 2018, (3) an order of the same court (Donald Scott Kurtz, J.) dated March 8, 2018,Īnd (4) an order of the same court (Donald Scott Kurtz, J.) dated April 12, 2018. J.), dated November 2, 2017, (2) an order of the same court (Kenneth P. In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant New York City TransitĪuthority appeals from (1) an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Donald Scott Kurtz, CorchiaĮlefterakis, Elefterakis & Panek, New York, NY (Oliver R. Published by New York State Law Reporting BureauĪs corrected through Wednesday, February 3, 2021Īrmienti, DeBellis, Guglielmo & Rhoden, LLP, New York, NY (Vanessa M. (2020 NY Slip Op 07171) Gelin v New York City Tr.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |