Padovani v. Miller

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Padovani v. Miller

8 A.D.3d 251, 777 N.Y.S.2d 309, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7443

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

DecidedJune 1, 2004

StatusPublished

This text of 8 A.D.3d 251 (Padovani v. Miller) 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

Padovani v. Miller, 8 A.D.3d 251, 777 N.Y.S.2d 309, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7443 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to [252]*252recover damages for dental malpractice, the defendants Gerald E. Miller and Gerald E. Miller, D.M.D., EC., appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Barone, J.), entered January 20, 2004, which denied their motion to compel the plaintiff to disclose copies of expert medical reports.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The appellants’ motion pursuant to 22 NYCRR 202.17 (b) (1) to compel the plaintiff to disclose copies of medical reports of medical providers who have treated or examined the plaintiff was properly denied (see generally Peterson v Wert, 134 AD2d 668 [1987]). Frudenti, P.J., Florio, H. Miller, Schmidt and Cozier, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to [252]*252recover damages for dental malpractice, the defendants Gerald E. Miller and Gerald E. Miller, D.M.D., EC., appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Barone, J.), entered January 20, 2004, which denied their motion to compel the plaintiff to disclose copies of expert medical reports.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The appellants’ motion pursuant to 22 NYCRR 202.17 (b) (1) to compel the plaintiff to disclose copies of medical reports of medical providers who have treated or examined the plaintiff was properly denied (see generally Peterson v Wert, 134 AD2d 668 [1987]). Frudenti, P.J., Florio, H. Miller, Schmidt and Cozier, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

8 A.D.3d 251, 777 N.Y.S.2d 309, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7443, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/padovani-v-miller-nyappdiv-2004.