Sims v. Metropolitan Transportation Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Sims v. Metropolitan Transportation Authority

123 A.D.3d 496, 996 N.Y.S.2d 529

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

DecidedDecember 9, 2014

Docket13741N 152309/13

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 123 A.D.3d 496 (Sims v. Metropolitan Transportation Authority) 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

Sims v. Metropolitan Transportation Authority, 123 A.D.3d 496, 996 N.Y.S.2d 529 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2014).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Michael D. Stall-man, J.), entered on or about June 3, 2013, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, granted petitioners’ application for pre-action disclosure of records of “mechanical malfunctions with respect to the movement [and/or] stopping of trains” operating on certain subway tracks within a specified 13-hour period, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

There is no reason to alter the court’s discretionary determination that petitioners have potentially viable causes of action for negligence and mishandling of decedent’s body, and that the information sought would materially assist them in framing their complaint and identifying prospective defendants (see Walker v Sandberg & Sikorski Corp. Firestone, Inc., 102 AD3d 415 [1st Dept 2013]; Matter of Champion v Metropolitan Tr. Auth., 70 AD3d 587 [1st Dept 2010]; CPLR 3102 [c]).

Concur— Mazzarelli, J.P., Renwick, Andrias, Saxe and Kapnick, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Michael D. Stall-man, J.), entered on or about June 3, 2013, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, granted petitioners’ application for pre-action disclosure of records of “mechanical malfunctions with respect to the movement [and/or] stopping of trains” operating on certain subway tracks within a specified 13-hour period, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

There is no reason to alter the court’s discretionary determination that petitioners have potentially viable causes of action for negligence and mishandling of decedent’s body, and that the information sought would materially assist them in framing their complaint and identifying prospective defendants (see Walker v Sandberg & Sikorski Corp. Firestone, Inc., 102 AD3d 415 [1st Dept 2013]; Matter of Champion v Metropolitan Tr. Auth., 70 AD3d 587 [1st Dept 2010]; CPLR 3102 [c]).

Concur— Mazzarelli, J.P., Renwick, Andrias, Saxe and Kapnick, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

123 A.D.3d 496, 996 N.Y.S.2d 529, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sims-v-metropolitan-transportation-authority-nyappdiv-2014.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack