Thorson v. New York City Transit Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Thorson v. New York City Transit Authority

305 A.D.2d 666, 759 N.Y.S.2d 880

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided May 27, 2003·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Hutcherson, J.), dated June 3, 2002, which denied his motion to quash a subpoena issued to a nonparty, Juan Cortes, directing him to appear for a deposition.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying the plaintiff’s motion to quash the subpoena issued to Juan Cortes. The defendant demonstrated that Cortes has information that is material and necessary to the defense of this [667]*667action (see CPLR 3101 [a] [4]), and that this information is otherwise unobtainable (see O’Neill v Oakgrove Constr., 71 NY2d 521, 526 [1988]; Abbadessa v Sprint, 291 AD2d 363 [2002]; Bostrom v William Penn Life Ins. Co. of N.Y., 285 AD2d 482 [2001]; Maxwell v Snapper, Inc., 249 AD2d 374 [1998]; Dioguardi v St. John’s Riverside Hosp., 144 AD2d 333 [1988]). Florio, J.P., S. Miller, Friedmann, Adams and Rivera, JJ., concur.

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

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Hutcherson, J.), dated June 3, 2002, which denied his motion to quash a subpoena issued to a nonparty, Juan Cortes, directing him to appear for a deposition.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying the plaintiff’s motion to quash the subpoena issued to Juan Cortes. The defendant demonstrated that Cortes has information that is material and necessary to the defense of this [667]*667action (see CPLR 3101 [a] [4]), and that this information is otherwise unobtainable (see O’Neill v Oakgrove Constr., 71 NY2d 521, 526 [1988]; Abbadessa v Sprint, 291 AD2d 363 [2002]; Bostrom v William Penn Life Ins. Co. of N.Y., 285 AD2d 482 [2001]; Maxwell v Snapper, Inc., 249 AD2d 374 [1998]; Dioguardi v St. John’s Riverside Hosp., 144 AD2d 333 [1988]). Florio, J.P., S. Miller, Friedmann, Adams and Rivera, JJ., concur.

Thorson v. New York City Transit Authority, 305 A.D.2d 666, 759 N.Y.S.2d 880 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

305 A.D.2d 666 (Thorson v. New York City Transit Authority) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related