RICH, M.D., STEVEN A. v. BENJAMIN, RONALD R.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

RICH, M.D., STEVEN A. v. BENJAMIN, RONALD R.

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

DecidedJune 14, 2013

DocketCA 12-02138

StatusPublished

This text of RICH, M.D., STEVEN A. v. BENJAMIN, RONALD R. (RICH, M.D., STEVEN A. v. BENJAMIN, RONALD R.) 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

RICH, M.D., STEVEN A. v. BENJAMIN, RONALD R., (N.Y. Ct. App. 2013).

Pincite

Opinion

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

544 CA 12-02138 PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., PERADOTTO, SCONIERS, VALENTINO, AND MARTOCHE, JJ.

STEVEN A. RICH, M.D., PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT,

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

RONALD R. BENJAMIN, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. (APPEAL NO. 2.)

LAW OFFICE OF RONALD R. BENJAMIN, BINGHAMTON (MARYA C. YOUNG OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

FARACI LANGE, LLP, ROCHESTER (STEPHEN G. SCHWARTZ OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT.

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Ontario County (Craig J. Doran, A.J.), entered August 31, 2012. The order, inter alia, denied the motion of defendant to compel discovery responses and for a protective order.

It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously modified on the law by granting those parts of defendant’s motion to compel plaintiff to disclose the documents sought in items 8 and 9 of defendant’s demand for production and inspection and as modified the order is affirmed without costs.

Same Memorandum as in Rich v Benjamin ([appeal No. 1] ___ AD3d ___ [June 14, 2013]).

Entered: June 14, 2013 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court

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