Moye v. Mount Sinai Hosp.

188 N.Y.S.3d 70, 216 A.D.3d 571, 2023 NY Slip Op 02828
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMay 25, 2023
DocketIndex No. 156584/21 Appeal No. 317 Case No. 2022-05611
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 188 N.Y.S.3d 70 (Moye v. Mount Sinai Hosp.) 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
Moye v. Mount Sinai Hosp., 188 N.Y.S.3d 70, 216 A.D.3d 571, 2023 NY Slip Op 02828 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2023).

Opinion

Moye v Mount Sinai Hosp. (2023 NY Slip Op 02828)
Moye v Mount Sinai Hosp.
2023 NY Slip Op 02828
Decided on May 25, 2023
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 25, 2023
Before: Kapnick, J.P., Friedman, Gesmer, Mendez, Pitt-Burke, JJ.

Index No. 156584/21 Appeal No. 317 Case No. 2022-05611

[*1]Ronald Moye et al., Plaintiffs-Respondents,

v

The Mount Sinai Hospital, et al., Defendants-Appellants.


Akerman LLP, New York (Rory J. McEvoy of counsel), for appellants.

Morgan & Morgan P.A., New York (Bryan Arbeit of counsel), for respondents.



Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Richard G. Latin, J.), entered on or about November 30, 2022, which, to the extent appealed from, directed defendant Jeffrey Cohen to provide plaintiffs with a statement of his net worth, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and plaintiffs' request for Cohen's net worth statement denied.

The order is not appealable as of right under CPLR 5701(a)(2) because it did not decide a motion made on notice. Rather, the court issued its order after a discovery conference. Nonetheless, we deem the notice of appeal from the order to be a motion for leave to appeal, and we grant the motion (see Marrero v Modern Food Ctr. Inc., 209 AD3d 533, 533-534 [1st Dept 2022]).

Supreme Court should not have directed Cohen to provide a net worth statement, as financial disclosures sought in support of a claim for punitive damages should await a special verdict on the question of liability (Suozzi v Parente, 161 AD2d 232, 232 [1st Dept 1990]; see also Rupert v Sellers, 48 AD2d 265, 272 [4th Dept 1975]).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER

OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.

ENTERED: May 25, 2023



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

Related

Rubin v. Napoli Bern Ripka Shkolnik, LLP
2025 NY Slip Op 31772(U) (New York Supreme Court, New York County, 2025)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
188 N.Y.S.3d 70, 216 A.D.3d 571, 2023 NY Slip Op 02828, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/moye-v-mount-sinai-hosp-nyappdiv-2023.