Rhodes v. Behesti

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Rhodes v. Behesti

61 A.D.2d 837, 402 N.Y.S.2d 791, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10304

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

DecidedFebruary 27, 1978

StatusPublished

This text of 61 A.D.2d 837 (Rhodes v. Behesti) 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

Rhodes v. Behesti, 61 A.D.2d 837, 402 N.Y.S.2d 791, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10304 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1978).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages against a physician, inter alia, for breach of a confidential relationship, defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated September 8, 1977, which granted plaintiff’s motion for a protective order vacating defendant’s demand for authorizations to examine and obtain certain hospital and medical records. Order reversed, with $50 costs and disbursements, and motion for a protective order denied. The authorizations shall be furnished within 20 days after service upon plaintiff of a copy of the order to be made hereon, together with notice of entry thereof. Under all of the circumstances, plaintiff’s physical condition was "in controversy” within the fair import of CPLR 3121 (subd [a]). Hopkins, J. P., Latham, Damiani and Titone, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to recover damages against a physician, inter alia, for breach of a confidential relationship, defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated September 8, 1977, which granted plaintiff’s motion for a protective order vacating defendant’s demand for authorizations to examine and obtain certain hospital and medical records. Order reversed, with $50 costs and disbursements, and motion for a protective order denied. The authorizations shall be furnished within 20 days after service upon plaintiff of a copy of the order to be made hereon, together with notice of entry thereof. Under all of the circumstances, plaintiff’s physical condition was "in controversy” within the fair import of CPLR 3121 (subd [a]). Hopkins, J. P., Latham, Damiani and Titone, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

61 A.D.2d 837, 402 N.Y.S.2d 791, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10304, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rhodes-v-behesti-nyappdiv-1978.