DeAddio v. Putnam Hospital Center

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

DeAddio v. Putnam Hospital Center

196 A.D.2d 804, 602 N.Y.S.2d 554

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

DecidedSeptember 13, 1993

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 196 A.D.2d 804 (DeAddio v. Putnam Hospital Center) 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

DeAddio v. Putnam Hospital Center, 196 A.D.2d 804, 602 N.Y.S.2d 554 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for medical malpractice, etc., the defendant Putnam Hospital Center appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Putnam County (Dickinson, J.), dated June 12, 1991, which denied its motion for a protective order pursuant to CPLR 3103 to the extent of directing it to serve upon the plaintiffs an unredacted copy of the minutes of a meeting of the Peer Review Committee and the names of the parties present.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying the appellant’s motion for a protective order, as the minutes in question fell within the exception to the privilege created by Education Law § 6527 (3) (see, Scalone v Phelps Mem. Hosp. Ctr., 184 AD2d 65). Mangano, P. J., Rosenblatt, Lawrence, Copertino and Joy, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to recover damages for medical malpractice, etc., the defendant Putnam Hospital Center appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Putnam County (Dickinson, J.), dated June 12, 1991, which denied its motion for a protective order pursuant to CPLR 3103 to the extent of directing it to serve upon the plaintiffs an unredacted copy of the minutes of a meeting of the Peer Review Committee and the names of the parties present.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying the appellant’s motion for a protective order, as the minutes in question fell within the exception to the privilege created by Education Law § 6527 (3) (see, Scalone v Phelps Mem. Hosp. Ctr., 184 AD2d 65). Mangano, P. J., Rosenblatt, Lawrence, Copertino and Joy, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

196 A.D.2d 804, 602 N.Y.S.2d 554, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/deaddio-v-putnam-hospital-center-nyappdiv-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack