Suozzi v. Parente

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Suozzi v. Parente

161 A.D.2d 232, 554 N.Y.S.2d 617, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4888

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

DecidedMay 3, 1990

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 161 A.D.2d 232 (Suozzi v. Parente) 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

Suozzi v. Parente, 161 A.D.2d 232, 554 N.Y.S.2d 617, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4888 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Walter M. Schackman, J.), entered June 26, 1989, denying plaintiffs oral application for the 1986 income tax records of defendants DeRiggi and Reilly, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff seeks the financial disclosure in this defamation action solely in support of his claim for punitive damages. Such discovery should await the return of a special verdict on the question of liability (Rupert v Sellers, 48 AD2d 265), and is inappropriate at this pretrial stage (Dufresne v Duemler, 108 AD2d 1102). At the very least, plaintiff must demonstrate some factual basis for his punitive damage claim before invading the financial privacy of the defendants (Moran v International Playtex, 103 AD2d 375). Concur—Kupferman, J. P., Ross, Asch, Ellerin and Rubin, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Walter M. Schackman, J.), entered June 26, 1989, denying plaintiffs oral application for the 1986 income tax records of defendants DeRiggi and Reilly, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff seeks the financial disclosure in this defamation action solely in support of his claim for punitive damages. Such discovery should await the return of a special verdict on the question of liability (Rupert v Sellers, 48 AD2d 265), and is inappropriate at this pretrial stage (Dufresne v Duemler, 108 AD2d 1102). At the very least, plaintiff must demonstrate some factual basis for his punitive damage claim before invading the financial privacy of the defendants (Moran v International Playtex, 103 AD2d 375). Concur—Kupferman, J. P., Ross, Asch, Ellerin and Rubin, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

161 A.D.2d 232, 554 N.Y.S.2d 617, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4888, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/suozzi-v-parente-nyappdiv-1990.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack