Levi v. Avis Rent-a-Car System, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Levi v. Avis Rent-a-Car System, Inc.

58 A.D.2d 538, 395 N.Y.S.2d 207, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12523

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

DecidedJune 16, 1977

StatusPublished

This text of 58 A.D.2d 538 (Levi v. Avis Rent-a-Car System, 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

Levi v. Avis Rent-a-Car System, Inc., 58 A.D.2d 538, 395 N.Y.S.2d 207, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12523 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1977).

Pincite

Opinion

— Two orders, Supreme Court, New York County, each entered September 24, 1976, granting plaintiff’s motions for protective orders, are unanimously reversed, on the law, the facts, and in the exercise of discretion, and the motions for protective orders are denied. Appellants shall recover of respondent $40 costs and disbursements of this appeal. There has been a sufficient showing of "special circumstances” within the meaning of CPLR 3101 (subd [a], par [4]) to permit examination of the nonparty witnesses. One of the nonparty witnesses is the only independent eyewitness to the accident; the other is the personnel manager of the company which employed plaintiff as executive vice-president. Plaintiff claims that as a result of the accident his employment was terminated and he lost earnings of $757,000. Both nonparty witnesses apparently possess unique and exclusive knowledge of material facts. Concur — Lupiano, J. P., Birns, Silverman and Markewich, JJ.

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

— Two orders, Supreme Court, New York County, each entered September 24, 1976, granting plaintiff’s motions for protective orders, are unanimously reversed, on the law, the facts, and in the exercise of discretion, and the motions for protective orders are denied. Appellants shall recover of respondent $40 costs and disbursements of this appeal. There has been a sufficient showing of "special circumstances” within the meaning of CPLR 3101 (subd [a], par [4]) to permit examination of the nonparty witnesses. One of the nonparty witnesses is the only independent eyewitness to the accident; the other is the personnel manager of the company which employed plaintiff as executive vice-president. Plaintiff claims that as a result of the accident his employment was terminated and he lost earnings of $757,000. Both nonparty witnesses apparently possess unique and exclusive knowledge of material facts. Concur — Lupiano, J. P., Birns, Silverman and Markewich, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

58 A.D.2d 538, 395 N.Y.S.2d 207, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12523, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/levi-v-avis-rent-a-car-system-inc-nyappdiv-1977.