Cassidy v. Livingston County

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJune 26, 2026
Docket533 CA 25-00888
StatusPublished

This text of Cassidy v. Livingston County (Cassidy v. Livingston County) 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
Cassidy v. Livingston County, (N.Y. Ct. App. 2026).

Opinion

Cassidy v Livingston County - 2026 NY Slip Op 04111
skip to main content

It appears you are using Adblock. Please disable Adblock to best experience our website.

Law Reporting
Bureau
Thomas J.K. Smith, State Reporter

Cassidy v Livingston County

2026 NY Slip Op 04111

June 26, 2026

Appellate Division, Fourth Department

Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.

This decision is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

STEPHEN CASSIDY, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT,

v

LIVINGSTON COUNTY AND LIVINGSTON COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT, DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS.

Supreme Court of the State of New York, Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

Decided on June 26, 2026

533 CA 25-00888

Present: Whalen, P.J., Curran, Ogden, Greenwood, And Hannah, JJ.

PHILLIPS LYTLE LLP, BUFFALO (RYAN A. LEMA OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS.

HERMAN LAW, NEW YORK CITY (CRAIG BERNHARDT OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT.

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Livingston County (Deborah A. Chimes, J.), entered May 19, 2025. The order directed defendants to produce unredacted documents to Supreme Court for in camera review.

[*1]

It is hereby ORDERED that said appeal is unanimously dismissed without costs.

Memorandum: In an action to recover damages for personal injuries pursuant to the Child Victims Act (see CPLR 214-g), defendants appeal from an order that directed the in camera review of unredacted documents sought by plaintiff in a motion to compel discovery. We conclude that the appeal must be dismissed. "Inasmuch as the order effectively defe[rs] the determination of the . . . motion [until] the completion of [Supreme Court's] in camera review, it does not affect a substantial right of defendant[s], and thus no appeal lies as of right therefrom" (Schwartz v Schwartz [appeal No. 2], 238 AD3d 1514, 1516 [4th Dept 2025] [internal quotation marks omitted]; see CPLR 5701 [a] [2] [v]; H.M. v Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn, 242 AD3d 735, 736 [2d Dept 2025]; Buhler v Sheridan, 134 AD2d 822, 822 [4th Dept 1987]).

Entered: June 26, 2026

Ann Dillon Flynn

Clerk of the Court

Court Decisions

All Court Decisions Official Reports Service Bound Volumes Decision Search

Resources

RSS Feeds Style Manual Citation Tools Opinion Formatting & Privacy Guidelines Opinion Selection Criteria Legal Research Portal Site Index

About

About the Law Reporting Bureau About our Operations Contact Us Twitter

Quick Contact Info

17 Lodge Street

Albany, NY 12207

Phone: (518) 453-6900

Links to or from other sites do not signify endorsement or relationship with them.

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

Related

Buhler v. Sheridan
134 A.D.2d 822 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1987)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Cassidy v. Livingston County, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cassidy-v-livingston-county-nyappdiv-2026.