Strauss v. New York Ethical Culture Society

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Strauss v. New York Ethical Culture Society

210 A.D.2d 134, 620 N.Y.S.2d 51

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

DecidedDecember 15, 1994

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 210 A.D.2d 134 (Strauss v. New York Ethical Culture Society) 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

Strauss v. New York Ethical Culture Society, 210 A.D.2d 134, 620 N.Y.S.2d 51 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

—-Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Karla Moskowitz, J.), entered on or about July 15, 1993, which denied defendant’s motion to strike the action from the calendar unless plaintiff submits to an orthopedic examination, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The IAS Court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to direct plaintiff to submit to a second physical examination by a doctor of defendant’s choosing, this time an orthopedist. That defendant, a year after its physical, examination of plaintiff by a plastic surgeon, became dissatisfied with its doctor’s ability to report on the full range of injuries alleged by plaintiff does not warrant such relief, where no new or additional injuries are claimed (DiMare v Mace Assocs., 178 AD2d 196), no showing is made that the first doctor was unqualified to render an orthopedic evaluation (cf., Rouen v Chrysler Credit Corp., 145 AD2d 381), and no other special circumstances have been shown. Concur—Rosenberger, J. P., Kupferman, Ross and Williams, JJ.

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

—-Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Karla Moskowitz, J.), entered on or about July 15, 1993, which denied defendant’s motion to strike the action from the calendar unless plaintiff submits to an orthopedic examination, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The IAS Court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to direct plaintiff to submit to a second physical examination by a doctor of defendant’s choosing, this time an orthopedist. That defendant, a year after its physical, examination of plaintiff by a plastic surgeon, became dissatisfied with its doctor’s ability to report on the full range of injuries alleged by plaintiff does not warrant such relief, where no new or additional injuries are claimed (DiMare v Mace Assocs., 178 AD2d 196), no showing is made that the first doctor was unqualified to render an orthopedic evaluation (cf., Rouen v Chrysler Credit Corp., 145 AD2d 381), and no other special circumstances have been shown. Concur—Rosenberger, J. P., Kupferman, Ross and Williams, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

210 A.D.2d 134, 620 N.Y.S.2d 51, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/strauss-v-new-york-ethical-culture-society-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack