Morillo v. 623-631 W. 207th St., LLC

167 N.Y.S.3d 396, 205 A.D.3d 649, 2022 NY Slip Op 03478
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMay 31, 2022
DocketIndex No. 151942/16 Appeal No. 16033 Case No. 2021-01741
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 167 N.Y.S.3d 396 (Morillo v. 623-631 W. 207th St., LLC) 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
Morillo v. 623-631 W. 207th St., LLC, 167 N.Y.S.3d 396, 205 A.D.3d 649, 2022 NY Slip Op 03478 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2022).

Opinion

Morillo v 623-631 W. 207th St., LLC (2022 NY Slip Op 03478)
Morillo v 623-631 W. 207th St., LLC
2022 NY Slip Op 03478
Decided on May 31, 2022
Appellate Division, First Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.


Decided and Entered: May 31, 2022
Before: Webber, J.P., Kern, Oing, Scarpulla, Pitt, JJ.

Index No. 151942/16 Appeal No. 16033 Case No. 2021-01741

[*1]Hilda Morillo, Plaintiff-Respondent,

v

623-631 West 207th Street, LLC, Defendant-Appellant.


Ahmuty, Demers & McManus, Albertson (Kevin J. Murtagh, Sr. of counsel), for appellant.

Pollack, Pollack, Isaac & DeCicco, LLP, New York (Brian J. Isaac of counsel), for respondent.



Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Barbara Jaffe, J.), entered April 6, 2021, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, denied defendant's motion to compel plaintiff to provide authorizations for the release of medical records from plaintiff's cardiologists, internist, and ophthalmologist, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

As the motion court properly found, defendant failed to show that plaintiff's heart condition or vision may have contributed to the accident in which she allegedly was injured. Further as plaintiff withdrew her loss of enjoyment of life claim, defendant failed to demonstrate how her claim that her health had been impaired as a result of the injuries sustained, required authorizations for the requested records from her

cardiologist, internist, and ophthalmologist (see Lafata v Verizon Communications Inc., 180 AD3d 575 [1st Dept 2020] Alford v City of New York, 116 AD3d 483, 484 [1st Dept 2014]).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER

OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.

ENTERED: May 31, 2022



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

Related

Martinez v. Hudson Yards N. Tower Tenant LLC
2024 NY Slip Op 06658 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2024)
US Bank N.A. v. Tabibnia
2024 NY Slip Op 03237 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2024)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
167 N.Y.S.3d 396, 205 A.D.3d 649, 2022 NY Slip Op 03478, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/morillo-v-623-631-w-207th-st-llc-nyappdiv-2022.