Davis v. Wilson Farms, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Davis v. Wilson Farms, Inc.

197 A.D.2d 887, 604 N.Y.S.2d 839, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9304

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

DecidedOctober 1, 1993

StatusPublished

This text of 197 A.D.2d 887 (Davis v. Wilson Farms, 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

Davis v. Wilson Farms, Inc., 197 A.D.2d 887, 604 N.Y.S.2d 839, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9304 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly granted plaintiff’s motion to compel defendant to disclose an accident report prepared by defendant’s employees and forwarded to the Risks Management Department of defendant’s parent company. The accident report was prepared in the ordinary course of defendant’s business (CPLR 3101 [g]) and defendant failed to prove that the report was not "motivated at least in part by a business concern other than preparation for litigation” (Cal-kins v Perry, 168 AD2d 999; see also, Harris v Processed Wood, 89 AD2d 220, 222). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Cosgrove, J.—Discovery.) Present—Green, J. P., Pine, Fallon, Doerr and Davis, JJ.

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

—Order unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly granted plaintiff’s motion to compel defendant to disclose an accident report prepared by defendant’s employees and forwarded to the Risks Management Department of defendant’s parent company. The accident report was prepared in the ordinary course of defendant’s business (CPLR 3101 [g]) and defendant failed to prove that the report was not "motivated at least in part by a business concern other than preparation for litigation” (Cal-kins v Perry, 168 AD2d 999; see also, Harris v Processed Wood, 89 AD2d 220, 222). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Cosgrove, J.—Discovery.) Present—Green, J. P., Pine, Fallon, Doerr and Davis, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

197 A.D.2d 887, 604 N.Y.S.2d 839, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9304, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/davis-v-wilson-farms-inc-nyappdiv-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack