Creekmore v. PSCH, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Creekmore v. PSCH, Inc.

60 A.D.3d 585, 874 N.Y.S.2d 907

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

DecidedMarch 31, 2009

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 60 A.D.3d 585 (Creekmore v. PSCH, Inc.) 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

Creekmore v. PSCH, Inc., 60 A.D.3d 585, 874 N.Y.S.2d 907 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

— Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Martin Shulman, J.), entered April 4, 2008, which, after an in camera document review, directed nonparty appellant Creed-moor Psychiatric Center to produce redacted copies of 10 of the 93 documents requested by defendant, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The motion court providently exercised its discretion in determining that redacted versions of 10 of the documents, purportedly subject to the statutory privilege afforded by Education Law § 6527 (3), are probative, material and necessary to aid defendant in its defense of this action, where appellant failed to demonstrate that it would suffer any prejudice by their production to defendant (see CPLR 3103; Education Law § 6527 [3]). Concur — Gonzalez, P.J., Tom, Sweeny, Catterson and Renwick, JJ.

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

— Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Martin Shulman, J.), entered April 4, 2008, which, after an in camera document review, directed nonparty appellant Creed-moor Psychiatric Center to produce redacted copies of 10 of the 93 documents requested by defendant, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The motion court providently exercised its discretion in determining that redacted versions of 10 of the documents, purportedly subject to the statutory privilege afforded by Education Law § 6527 (3), are probative, material and necessary to aid defendant in its defense of this action, where appellant failed to demonstrate that it would suffer any prejudice by their production to defendant (see CPLR 3103; Education Law § 6527 [3]). Concur — Gonzalez, P.J., Tom, Sweeny, Catterson and Renwick, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

60 A.D.3d 585, 874 N.Y.S.2d 907, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/creekmore-v-psch-inc-nyappdiv-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack