Neal v. State Mutual Life Assurance Co. of America

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Neal v. State Mutual Life Assurance Co. of America

143 A.D.2d 516, 533 N.Y.S.2d 38, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10745

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

DecidedSeptember 27, 1988

StatusPublished

This text of 143 A.D.2d 516 (Neal v. State Mutual Life Assurance Co. of America) 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

Neal v. State Mutual Life Assurance Co. of America, 143 A.D.2d 516, 533 N.Y.S.2d 38, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10745 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1988).

Pincite

Opinion

Order unanimously modified on the law and as modified affirmed without costs, in accordance with the following memorandum: On plaintiff’s cross appeal from an order denying in part his third notice to produce, we determine that the court erroneously denied plaintiff access to post-September 1983 sales figures for his former clients. The present status of plaintiff’s former accounts is arguably relevant to his claim for damages. Therefore, we modify the order to grant plaintiff’s first request in its entirety.

On defendant’s appeal from that portion of the same order [517]*517which granted plaintiffs request in part, we determine that the court erred in granting plaintiff access to sales figures for all clients of the Buffalo region from 1977 through September 1983. The court granted something plaintiff did not ask for, i.e., pre-September 1983 sales figures. Moreover, such figures have no relevance to plaintiffs service to clients in the Rochester region during his tenure with defendant since the territories were not merged until after plaintiff was terminated. Therefore, we modify the order appealed from to deny plaintiff’s second request.

We have examined the remaining contentions of the parties and conclude they are without merit. (Appeals from order of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Curran, J. — discovery.) Present — Callahan, J. P., Denman, Boomer, Green and Lawton, JJ.

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

Order unanimously modified on the law and as modified affirmed without costs, in accordance with the following memorandum: On plaintiff’s cross appeal from an order denying in part his third notice to produce, we determine that the court erroneously denied plaintiff access to post-September 1983 sales figures for his former clients. The present status of plaintiff’s former accounts is arguably relevant to his claim for damages. Therefore, we modify the order to grant plaintiff’s first request in its entirety.

On defendant’s appeal from that portion of the same order [517]*517which granted plaintiffs request in part, we determine that the court erred in granting plaintiff access to sales figures for all clients of the Buffalo region from 1977 through September 1983. The court granted something plaintiff did not ask for, i.e., pre-September 1983 sales figures. Moreover, such figures have no relevance to plaintiffs service to clients in the Rochester region during his tenure with defendant since the territories were not merged until after plaintiff was terminated. Therefore, we modify the order appealed from to deny plaintiff’s second request.

We have examined the remaining contentions of the parties and conclude they are without merit. (Appeals from order of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Curran, J. — discovery.) Present — Callahan, J. P., Denman, Boomer, Green and Lawton, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

143 A.D.2d 516, 533 N.Y.S.2d 38, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10745, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/neal-v-state-mutual-life-assurance-co-of-america-nyappdiv-1988.