Vicat v. Jamaica Hospital
This text of 110 A.D.2d 896 (Vicat v. Jamaica Hospital) 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.
Opinion
[897]*897Items Nos. 4 and 5 of the respondent’s demand for a bill of particulars seeks information relating to the giving by plaintiff to respondent of any notice required in this matter. Plaintiff responded to this demand by pointing out, in effect, that it was not relevant or applicable to a medical malpractice action. We agree with plaintiff and find as a matter of law that plaintiff should not be required to give a further response to these items. We know of no notice requirement in a medical malpractice action as either a condition precedent or a prerequisite to maintaining such an action. Accordingly, it was error for Special Term to require an additional response to such a demand which appears to be a simple recapitulation of the applicable statute (see, CPLR 3043 [a] [4], [5]). In such circumstances, a court is empowered to deny a request for a response to such a demand (see, CPLR 3043 [c]). Titone, J. P., Lazer, Niehoff and Rubin, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
110 A.D.2d 896, 488 N.Y.S.2d 449, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 48800, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/vicat-v-jamaica-hospital-nyappdiv-1985.