Madison v. Sama

92 A.D.3d 607, 938 N.Y.2d 802
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedFebruary 28, 2012
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 92 A.D.3d 607 (Madison v. Sama) 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
Madison v. Sama, 92 A.D.3d 607, 938 N.Y.2d 802 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2012).

Opinion

Plaintiff requested leave to conduct a further deposition of defendant Sama after filing a note of issue and certificate of readiness for trial. The only reason that plaintiff proffered for this request was that the expert engaged by his new counsel to review the file had discovered areas of inquiry that his former counsel had failed to pursue. This is insufficient to establish that “unusual or unanticipated circumstances” had developed requiring further discovery “to prevent substantial prejudice” (see 22 NYCRR 202.21 [d]; Schroeder v IESI NY Corp., 24 AD3d 180 [2005]). Concur — Andrias, J.P, Catterson, Abdus-Salaam and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.

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

Related

Flores v. Infrastructure Repair Service, LLC
52 Misc. 3d 664 (New York Supreme Court, 2015)
Madison v. Sama
105 A.D.3d 581 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2013)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
92 A.D.3d 607, 938 N.Y.2d 802, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/madison-v-sama-nyappdiv-2012.