Abony v. TLC Laser Eye Center, Inc.

44 A.D.3d 553, 843 N.Y.S.2d 509

This text of 44 A.D.3d 553 (Abony v. TLC Laser Eye Center, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Abony v. TLC Laser Eye Center, Inc., 44 A.D.3d 553, 843 N.Y.S.2d 509 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2007).

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Sheila Abdus-Salaam, J.), entered December 13, 2006, which denied defendant’s motion to vacate plaintiff s note of issue and certificate of readiness, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The motion was properly denied as the discovery claimed by defendants as remaining outstanding was either previously provided, publicly available, properly objected to as unduly burdensome, or not demanded until after the note of issue was filed (see Konrad v 136 E. 64th St. Corp., 209 AD2d 228 [1994]; Penn Palace Operating v Two Penn Plaza Assoc., 215 AD2d 231 [1995]). Furthermore, many of the items that defendants’ expert claims are necessary to evaluate plaintiff’s claim were never demanded by defendants in any of their respective notices served prior to plaintiffs filing of the note of issue. Concur— Tom, J.E, Saxe, Nardelli, Sweeny and Catterson, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Konrad v. 136 East 64th Street Corp.
209 A.D.2d 228 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1994)
Penn Palace Operating, Inc. v. Two Penn Plaza Associates
215 A.D.2d 231 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1995)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
44 A.D.3d 553, 843 N.Y.S.2d 509, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/abony-v-tlc-laser-eye-center-inc-nyappdiv-2007.