Villalona v. Bronx-Lebanon Hospital Center

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Villalona v. Bronx-Lebanon Hospital Center

261 A.D.2d 185, 690 N.Y.S.2d 31, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5262

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

DecidedMay 11, 1999

StatusPublished

Cited by7 cases

This text of 261 A.D.2d 185 (Villalona v. Bronx-Lebanon Hospital Center) 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

Villalona v. Bronx-Lebanon Hospital Center, 261 A.D.2d 185, 690 N.Y.S.2d 31, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5262 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Gerald Esposito, J.), entered January 4, 1999, which, insofar as appealed from, denied defendant-appellant’s motion to vacate plaintiffs’ note of issue, strike plaintiffs’ fourth supplemental bill of particulars, and compel plaintiffs to provide expert witness disclosure, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiffs’ fourth supplemental bill of particulars does not allege new injuries, but elaborates on injuries that had been alleged in previous bills of particulars, purporting only to set forth the extent of plaintiffs’ continuing disabilities as they became more apparent over time and, in the infant plaintiffs case, with increased age and development (CPLR 3043 [b]; see, Tate v Colabello, 58 NY2d 84, 86-87; Clarke v Yonkers Gen. Hosp., 228 AD2d 152). Nor is there reason to interfere with the IAS Court’s supervision of disclosure and control of its own calendar, where defendant does not claim that there were any outstanding disclosure notices at the time plaintiffs filed the note of issue and was given ample opportunity by the IAS Court to complete needed remaining disclosure with the case on the calendar (see, Kamyr, Inc. v Combustion Eng’g, 183 AD2d 500). Defendant’s demand for expert witness disclosure was properly denied as moot. Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Williams, Wallach, Rubin and Mazzarelli, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Gerald Esposito, J.), entered January 4, 1999, which, insofar as appealed from, denied defendant-appellant’s motion to vacate plaintiffs’ note of issue, strike plaintiffs’ fourth supplemental bill of particulars, and compel plaintiffs to provide expert witness disclosure, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiffs’ fourth supplemental bill of particulars does not allege new injuries, but elaborates on injuries that had been alleged in previous bills of particulars, purporting only to set forth the extent of plaintiffs’ continuing disabilities as they became more apparent over time and, in the infant plaintiffs case, with increased age and development (CPLR 3043 [b]; see, Tate v Colabello, 58 NY2d 84, 86-87; Clarke v Yonkers Gen. Hosp., 228 AD2d 152). Nor is there reason to interfere with the IAS Court’s supervision of disclosure and control of its own calendar, where defendant does not claim that there were any outstanding disclosure notices at the time plaintiffs filed the note of issue and was given ample opportunity by the IAS Court to complete needed remaining disclosure with the case on the calendar (see, Kamyr, Inc. v Combustion Eng’g, 183 AD2d 500). Defendant’s demand for expert witness disclosure was properly denied as moot. Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Williams, Wallach, Rubin and Mazzarelli, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

261 A.D.2d 185, 690 N.Y.S.2d 31, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5262, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/villalona-v-bronx-lebanon-hospital-center-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack