Fasciglione v. D.C.D. Advertising, Ltd.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Fasciglione v. D.C.D. Advertising, Ltd.

256 A.D.2d 215, 682 N.Y.S.2d 839, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14522

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

DecidedDecember 22, 1998

StatusPublished

This text of 256 A.D.2d 215 (Fasciglione v. D.C.D. Advertising, Ltd.) 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

Fasciglione v. D.C.D. Advertising, Ltd., 256 A.D.2d 215, 682 N.Y.S.2d 839, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14522 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Alan Saks, J.), entered October 1, 1997, which, inter alia, denied defendants’ motion to depose the plaintiffs with leave to renew, unanimously reversed, on the law, the facts and in the exercise of discretion, without costs, and the motion to depose plaintiffs granted.

CPLR 3106 grants parties the right to depose any person and does not require a prior showing of materiality. The preliminary order relied on by the IAS Court was based on the erroneous assumption that the deposition of plaintiff Appolonia Fasciglione in a related Federal action would completely suffice in this action, although these defendants were not parties to the Federal action and the defendant in the Federal action faced a lesser degree of potential liability. Consequently, it was error here to abrogate the defendants’ right to depose plaintiffs. Concur — Nardelli, J. P., Wallach, Rubin and Williams, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Alan Saks, J.), entered October 1, 1997, which, inter alia, denied defendants’ motion to depose the plaintiffs with leave to renew, unanimously reversed, on the law, the facts and in the exercise of discretion, without costs, and the motion to depose plaintiffs granted.

CPLR 3106 grants parties the right to depose any person and does not require a prior showing of materiality. The preliminary order relied on by the IAS Court was based on the erroneous assumption that the deposition of plaintiff Appolonia Fasciglione in a related Federal action would completely suffice in this action, although these defendants were not parties to the Federal action and the defendant in the Federal action faced a lesser degree of potential liability. Consequently, it was error here to abrogate the defendants’ right to depose plaintiffs. Concur — Nardelli, J. P., Wallach, Rubin and Williams, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

256 A.D.2d 215, 682 N.Y.S.2d 839, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14522, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fasciglione-v-dcd-advertising-ltd-nyappdiv-1998.