Murray v. New York City Health & Hospitals Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Murray v. New York City Health & Hospitals Corp.

215 A.D.2d 736, 627 N.Y.S.2d 969, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5768

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

DecidedMay 30, 1995

StatusPublished

This text of 215 A.D.2d 736 (Murray v. New York City Health & Hospitals Corp.) 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

Murray v. New York City Health & Hospitals Corp., 215 A.D.2d 736, 627 N.Y.S.2d 969, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5768 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for wrongful-death and medical malpractice, the plaintiffs appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Spodek, J.), dated May 11, 1994, as, upon reargument, (1) adhered to so much of its original determination as granted the branch of the defendants’ motion which was to quash the subpoena served upon nonparty Louis Camilien, and (2) limited their discovery of seven nonparty nurses to written interrogatories.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in refusing to permit the plaintiffs to depose nonparty Louis Camilien (see, Jira v Levin-Epstein, 172 AD2d 495). The plaintiffs failed to establish that he possessed material and relevant information that could not be obtained either from [737]*737one of the defendants or from another source (Jira v LevinEpstein, supra).

Nor did the court improvidently exercise its discretion in limiting, for the time being, the plaintiffs’ discovery of the seven nurses who cared for the plaintiffs’ decedent in the recovery room to the service of interrogatories upon them. Mangano, P. J., O’Brien, Ritter, Pizzuto and Florio, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to recover damages for wrongful-death and medical malpractice, the plaintiffs appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Spodek, J.), dated May 11, 1994, as, upon reargument, (1) adhered to so much of its original determination as granted the branch of the defendants’ motion which was to quash the subpoena served upon nonparty Louis Camilien, and (2) limited their discovery of seven nonparty nurses to written interrogatories.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in refusing to permit the plaintiffs to depose nonparty Louis Camilien (see, Jira v Levin-Epstein, 172 AD2d 495). The plaintiffs failed to establish that he possessed material and relevant information that could not be obtained either from [737]*737one of the defendants or from another source (Jira v LevinEpstein, supra).

Nor did the court improvidently exercise its discretion in limiting, for the time being, the plaintiffs’ discovery of the seven nurses who cared for the plaintiffs’ decedent in the recovery room to the service of interrogatories upon them. Mangano, P. J., O’Brien, Ritter, Pizzuto and Florio, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

215 A.D.2d 736, 627 N.Y.S.2d 969, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5768, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/murray-v-new-york-city-health-hospitals-corp-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack