Brown v. Bazin

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Brown v. Bazin

121 A.D.2d 422, 503 N.Y.S.2d 120, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 58386

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedJune 9, 1986

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 121 A.D.2d 422 (Brown v. Bazin) 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

Brown v. Bazin, 121 A.D.2d 422, 503 N.Y.S.2d 120, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 58386 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1986).

Pincite

Opinion

In a medical malpractice action, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Durante, J.), dated April 2, 1985, which denied his application for an order striking the complaint as a sanction for failing to serve a proper bill of particulars and granting summary judgment based upon such condition.

Order reversed, as a matter of discretion, with costs, and motion granted.

Despite several opportunities to do so, the plaintiff has failed in various bills of particulars to apprise the defendant of the specific acts of negligence constituting the medical malpractice charged in the complaint. The complaint speaks [423]*423without specification and although the demand for a bill of particulars included inquiry into specific allegations, the plaintiff in her several bills of particulars failed to give the information requested. Considering the lengthy history of the defendant’s attempts to obtain the information to which he is entitled, the complaint should be dismissed (see, Siegel, NY Prac § 241). Lazer, J. P., Brown, Rubin and Eiber, JJ., concur.

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

In a medical malpractice action, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Durante, J.), dated April 2, 1985, which denied his application for an order striking the complaint as a sanction for failing to serve a proper bill of particulars and granting summary judgment based upon such condition.

Order reversed, as a matter of discretion, with costs, and motion granted.

Despite several opportunities to do so, the plaintiff has failed in various bills of particulars to apprise the defendant of the specific acts of negligence constituting the medical malpractice charged in the complaint. The complaint speaks [423]*423without specification and although the demand for a bill of particulars included inquiry into specific allegations, the plaintiff in her several bills of particulars failed to give the information requested. Considering the lengthy history of the defendant’s attempts to obtain the information to which he is entitled, the complaint should be dismissed (see, Siegel, NY Prac § 241). Lazer, J. P., Brown, Rubin and Eiber, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

121 A.D.2d 422, 503 N.Y.S.2d 120, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 58386, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brown-v-bazin-nyappdiv-1986.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack