Puntoriero v. Johnson

115 A.D.2d 229, 496 N.Y.S.2d 125, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 54474
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedNovember 15, 1985
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 115 A.D.2d 229 (Puntoriero v. Johnson) 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
Puntoriero v. Johnson, 115 A.D.2d 229, 496 N.Y.S.2d 125, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 54474 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1985).

Opinion

Order unanimously modified, on the law, and, as modified, affirmed without costs, in accordance with the following memorandum: Defendants’ motion for a protective order should have been granted with respect to materials sought under paragraph 3 of plaintiffs’ CPLR 3120 demand. Defendants’ affidavits establish that the Board of Education retained professional investigators to interview witnesses and prepare reports solely to assist the Board in defense of plaintiffs’ action. Plaintiffs failed to rebut that but argue that material prepared for litigation is only conditionally immune from disclosure and may be inspected if it cannot be duplicated. Because the Board’s investigation took place immediately after the incident, plaintiffs contend that these investigative reports contain information which is now stale or unobtainable. Plaintiffs have made no showing that they have attempted to interview people with knowledge of the incident or [230]*230been unable to do so. The order is therefore modified to preclude inspection of these reports without prejudice to renewal of the demand on a showing that plaintiffs have been unable to duplicate the material and will be prejudiced without it (see, New England Seafoods v Travelers Cos., 84 AD2d 676, 677; see also, Matter of Weaver v Waterville Knitting Mills, 78 AD2d 574, 575). (Appeals from order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Francis, J.—protective order.) Present— Dillon, P. J., Callahan, Denman, Boomer and Pine, JJ.

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

Related

Kobre v. United Jewish Appeal-Federation of Jewish Philanthropies of New York, Inc.
288 A.D.2d 157 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2001)
Careccia v. Enstrom
174 A.D.2d 48 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1992)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
115 A.D.2d 229, 496 N.Y.S.2d 125, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 54474, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/puntoriero-v-johnson-nyappdiv-1985.