Deeley v. Leo's Den, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Deeley v. Leo's Den, Inc.

126 A.D.2d 698, 511 N.Y.S.2d 301, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 41841

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

DecidedJanuary 26, 1987

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 126 A.D.2d 698 (Deeley v. Leo's Den, 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

Deeley v. Leo's Den, Inc., 126 A.D.2d 698, 511 N.Y.S.2d 301, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 41841 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1987).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for assault, the defendant John Giordano appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Kelly, J.), dated September 17, 1985, which denied his motion to compel the plaintiff to submit to a physical examination at the office of the appellant’s doctor.

Ordered that the order is reversed, with costs, and the motion is granted to the extent that plaintiff is directed to submit to a physical examination at a time and place, and by a physician, to be designated by the appellant in a written notice of not less than 10 days, or at such other time and place as the parties may agree.

In light of the reasonable excuse offered by the appellant for failing to timely move to vacate or modify the plaintiffs notice for physical examination, i.e., the undisputed basis for conducting said examination at the office of the appellant’s designated doctor because of the need for nontransportable instruments, the general diligence exercised by the appellant in asserting his position, and the lack of prejudice to the plaintiff, the examination shall proceed as indicated (see, De Chiaro v Rendell, 95 AD2d 792). Mollen, P. J., Bracken, Lawrence, Kooper and Sullivan, JJ., concur.

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

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for assault, the defendant John Giordano appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Kelly, J.), dated September 17, 1985, which denied his motion to compel the plaintiff to submit to a physical examination at the office of the appellant’s doctor.

Ordered that the order is reversed, with costs, and the motion is granted to the extent that plaintiff is directed to submit to a physical examination at a time and place, and by a physician, to be designated by the appellant in a written notice of not less than 10 days, or at such other time and place as the parties may agree.

In light of the reasonable excuse offered by the appellant for failing to timely move to vacate or modify the plaintiffs notice for physical examination, i.e., the undisputed basis for conducting said examination at the office of the appellant’s designated doctor because of the need for nontransportable instruments, the general diligence exercised by the appellant in asserting his position, and the lack of prejudice to the plaintiff, the examination shall proceed as indicated (see, De Chiaro v Rendell, 95 AD2d 792). Mollen, P. J., Bracken, Lawrence, Kooper and Sullivan, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

126 A.D.2d 698, 511 N.Y.S.2d 301, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 41841, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/deeley-v-leos-den-inc-nyappdiv-1987.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack