Cardillo v. Bonito

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Cardillo v. Bonito

256 A.D.2d 69, 681 N.Y.S.2d 752, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13115

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

DecidedDecember 8, 1998

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 256 A.D.2d 69 (Cardillo v. Bonito) 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

Cardillo v. Bonito, 256 A.D.2d 69, 681 N.Y.S.2d 752, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13115 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Bertram Katz, J.), entered March 25, 1998, denying defendants’ motions to vacate the note of issue, unanimously modified, on the law, the facts and in the exercise of discretion, to allow defendant Lydia Bonito, individually and as executrix of the Estate of Fedele Bonito, deceased, through a physician of her choice, to conduct a physical examination of plaintiff Marco Cardillo within 45 days of the entry of this order and, except as thus modified, affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

It was an improvident exercise of discretion to deny defendant the opportunity to conduct a physical examination of plaintiff Marco Cardillo on the ground that she had failed to do so within the time constraints set forth in a preliminary conference order, especially in light of the fact that the note of issue was filed four months before the discovery deadline contained in the preliminary conference order. We modify to provide for such examination. Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Wallach, Mazzarelli and Andrias, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Bertram Katz, J.), entered March 25, 1998, denying defendants’ motions to vacate the note of issue, unanimously modified, on the law, the facts and in the exercise of discretion, to allow defendant Lydia Bonito, individually and as executrix of the Estate of Fedele Bonito, deceased, through a physician of her choice, to conduct a physical examination of plaintiff Marco Cardillo within 45 days of the entry of this order and, except as thus modified, affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

It was an improvident exercise of discretion to deny defendant the opportunity to conduct a physical examination of plaintiff Marco Cardillo on the ground that she had failed to do so within the time constraints set forth in a preliminary conference order, especially in light of the fact that the note of issue was filed four months before the discovery deadline contained in the preliminary conference order. We modify to provide for such examination. Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Wallach, Mazzarelli and Andrias, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

256 A.D.2d 69, 681 N.Y.S.2d 752, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13115, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cardillo-v-bonito-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack