Gorman, Naim & Musa v. ABJ Fire Protection, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Gorman, Naim & Musa v. ABJ Fire Protection, Inc.

195 A.D.2d 1062, 601 N.Y.S.2d 883

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided July 16, 1993·No. Appeal No. 1·Published

Opinion

Order unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court’s order directing a deposition of plaintiffs’-third-party defendants’ expert limited to his factual observations was not an abuse of discretion under the special circumstances existing here (see, CPLR 3101 [d] [1] [iii]; Rosario v General Motors Corp., 148 AD2d 108; Morrison v Ellis, 91 AD2d 1172; see also, Krygier v Airweld, Inc., 176 AD2d 700). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Onondaga County, Reagan, J.— Protective Order.) Present—Pine, J. P., Fallon, Boomer, Davis and Boehm, 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’s order directing a deposition of plaintiffs’-third-party defendants’ expert limited to his factual observations was not an abuse of discretion under the special circumstances existing here (see, CPLR 3101 [d] [1] [iii]; Rosario v General Motors Corp., 148 AD2d 108; Morrison v Ellis, 91 AD2d 1172; see also, Krygier v Airweld, Inc., 176 AD2d 700). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Onondaga County, Reagan, J.— Protective Order.) Present—Pine, J. P., Fallon, Boomer, Davis and Boehm, JJ.

Gorman, Naim & Musa v. ABJ Fire Protection, Inc., 195 A.D.2d 1062, 601 N.Y.S.2d 883 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

195 A.D.2d 1062 (Gorman, Naim & Musa v. ABJ Fire Protection, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related