Olivo v. Nazario

2017 NY Slip Op 7559, 154 A.D.3d 624, 62 N.Y.S.3d 789

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Ben R. Barbato, J.), entered January 26, 2017, which denied the motion of defendant New York City Housing Authority (NYCHA) to strike plaintiff’s supplemental bill of particulars and preclude his expert, unanimously modified, on the law and the facts, to permit limited discovery on newly specified claims of future surgery, and otherwise affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff’s supplemental bill of particulars did not claim new injuries, but sequelae of the original injuries pleaded (see Spiegel v Gingrich, 74 AD3d 425, 427 [1st Dept 2010]; Maisonet v New York City Hous. Auth., 276 AD2d 260 [1st Dept 2000]; Villalona v Bronx-Lebanon Hosp. Ctr., 261 AD2d 185, 185 [1st Dept 1999]). However, given that a need for future surgeries had only previously been pleaded in the most vague and boilerplate terms, and his medical records showed no indication that future surgery would be necessary, discovery limited to those newly specified injuries is warranted (see Hartnett v City of New York, 139 AD3d 506 [1st Dept 2016]; Villalona).

Concur— Acosta, P.J., Manzanet-Daniels, Gische, Kapnick and Kahn, JJ.