Campbell v. Peele

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Campbell v. Peele

289 A.D.2d 141, 734 N.Y.S.2d 449, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12379

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

DecidedDecember 20, 2001

StatusPublished

This text of 289 A.D.2d 141 (Campbell v. Peele) 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

Campbell v. Peele, 289 A.D.2d 141, 734 N.Y.S.2d 449, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12379 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Anne Targum, J.), entered on or about March 23, 2001, which, in an action for personal injuries arising out of a car accident involving a car owned by the corporate defen[142]*142dant and rented by the individual defendant, denied plaintiffs’ motion to strike defendants’ answer because of the individual defendant’s failure to appear for deposition, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The motion was properly denied with a direction precluding the individual defendant from testifying at trial unless she appears for deposition at least 60 days prior to trial, in view of the individual defendant’s apparent change of address and defense counsel’s ongoing good faith efforts to locate her (see, Heyward v Benyarko, 82 AD2d 751). Concur — Sullivan, P. J., Nardelli, Mazzarelli, Rubin and Saxe, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Anne Targum, J.), entered on or about March 23, 2001, which, in an action for personal injuries arising out of a car accident involving a car owned by the corporate defen[142]*142dant and rented by the individual defendant, denied plaintiffs’ motion to strike defendants’ answer because of the individual defendant’s failure to appear for deposition, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The motion was properly denied with a direction precluding the individual defendant from testifying at trial unless she appears for deposition at least 60 days prior to trial, in view of the individual defendant’s apparent change of address and defense counsel’s ongoing good faith efforts to locate her (see, Heyward v Benyarko, 82 AD2d 751). Concur — Sullivan, P. J., Nardelli, Mazzarelli, Rubin and Saxe, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

289 A.D.2d 141, 734 N.Y.S.2d 449, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12379, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/campbell-v-peele-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack