Chu v. Goldberg

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Chu v. Goldberg

51 A.D.2d 757, 379 N.Y.S.2d 504, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11310

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

DecidedFebruary 17, 1976

StatusPublished

This text of 51 A.D.2d 757 (Chu v. Goldberg) 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

Chu v. Goldberg, 51 A.D.2d 757, 379 N.Y.S.2d 504, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11310 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

In a negligence action to [758]*758recover damages for personal injuries, etc., plaintiff Mary Chu appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated June 6, 1975, but described in the notice of appeal as being dated May 29, 1975, which granted defendant Monachino’s motion to direct the said plaintiff to submit to a physical examination. Order affirmed, without costs or disbursements. The examination shull proceed at a time and place to be fixed in a written notice of not less than 10 days, to be given by defendant Monachino, or at such time and place as the parties may agree. Under all of the circumstances in this case, Special Term properly exercised its discretion in granting the relief sought. The examination should be held forthwith. Gulotta, P. J., Hopkins, Martuscello, Latham and Shapiro, JJ., concur.

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

In a negligence action to [758]*758recover damages for personal injuries, etc., plaintiff Mary Chu appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated June 6, 1975, but described in the notice of appeal as being dated May 29, 1975, which granted defendant Monachino’s motion to direct the said plaintiff to submit to a physical examination. Order affirmed, without costs or disbursements. The examination shull proceed at a time and place to be fixed in a written notice of not less than 10 days, to be given by defendant Monachino, or at such time and place as the parties may agree. Under all of the circumstances in this case, Special Term properly exercised its discretion in granting the relief sought. The examination should be held forthwith. Gulotta, P. J., Hopkins, Martuscello, Latham and Shapiro, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

51 A.D.2d 757, 379 N.Y.S.2d 504, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11310, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chu-v-goldberg-nyappdiv-1976.