McGowan v. Great Northern Insurance

88 A.D.3d 665, 930 N.Y.2d 881
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided October 4, 2011·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Since the persons upon whom the appellant served the subject [666]*666subpoenas are expert witnesses (see Russo v Quincy Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 256 AD2d 1164 [1998]), the appellant was required to make a showing of special circumstances warranting depositions of those witnesses (see CPLR 3101 [d] [1] [iii]; Kooper v Kooper, 74 AD3d 6, 12, 16 [2010]). The appellant failed to establish the existence of such circumstances, and thus the Supreme Court properly granted that branch of the plaintiffs’ motion which was to quash the subject subpoenas (see CPLR 3101 [d] [1] [iii]; Fekete v GA Ins. Co. of N.Y., 279 AD2d 300 [2001]; Russo v Quincy Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 256 AD2d at 1164). Prudenti, PJ., Rivera, Austin and Roman, JJ., concur.

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

McGowan v. Great Northern Insurance, 88 A.D.3d 665, 930 N.Y.2d 881 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2011).

88 A.D.3d 665 (McGowan v. Great Northern Insurance) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Bernardis v. Town of Islip
95 A.D.3d 1050 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)