De Feyo v. Town of Eastchester

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

De Feyo v. Town of Eastchester

65 A.D.2d 616, 409 N.Y.S.2d 546, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13306

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

DecidedOctober 30, 1978

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 65 A.D.2d 616 (De Feyo v. Town of Eastchester) 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

De Feyo v. Town of Eastchester, 65 A.D.2d 616, 409 N.Y.S.2d 546, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13306 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1978).

Pincite

Opinion

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, dated July 12, 1978, which, inter alia, granted defendant’s motion to direct the injured plaintiff to submit to a physical examination by a doctor chosen by the defendant. Order affirmed, with $50 costs and disbursements. Even though the defendant did not move within five days after plaintiffs served their notice for examination (see 22 NYCRR 672.2), Special Term properly exercised its discretion in (1) granting the defendant’s motion and (2) directing plaintiffs to furnish the defendant with copies of the reports of doctors who had previously treated or examined the injured plaintiff. Mollen, P. J., Hopkins, Titone and O’Connor, JJ., concur; Hawkins, J., not voting.

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

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, dated July 12, 1978, which, inter alia, granted defendant’s motion to direct the injured plaintiff to submit to a physical examination by a doctor chosen by the defendant. Order affirmed, with $50 costs and disbursements. Even though the defendant did not move within five days after plaintiffs served their notice for examination (see 22 NYCRR 672.2), Special Term properly exercised its discretion in (1) granting the defendant’s motion and (2) directing plaintiffs to furnish the defendant with copies of the reports of doctors who had previously treated or examined the injured plaintiff. Mollen, P. J., Hopkins, Titone and O’Connor, JJ., concur; Hawkins, J., not voting.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

65 A.D.2d 616, 409 N.Y.S.2d 546, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13306, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/de-feyo-v-town-of-eastchester-nyappdiv-1978.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack