Whelton v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Whelton v. City of New York

215 A.D.2d 650, 628 N.Y.S.2d 503, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5487

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

DecidedMay 22, 1995

StatusPublished

This text of 215 A.D.2d 650 (Whelton v. City of New York) 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

Whelton v. City of New York, 215 A.D.2d 650, 628 N.Y.S.2d 503, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5487 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant Bernard Waltier appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Lerner, J.), dated January 7, 1994, as, upon reargument, adhered to a prior determination compelling him to respond to items 9 (g) through 9 (l) and items 10 (a) through 10 (e) of the plaintiffs "combined demands” for discovery.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The items of the plaintiffs combined discovery demands at issue on this appeal are material and necessary to the prosecution of the action and, therefore, should be disclosed (see, CPLR 3101 [a]; Allen v Crowell-Collier Publ. Co., 21 NY2d 403). Bracken, J. P., Rosenblatt, Krausman and Goldstein, 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 defendant Bernard Waltier appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Lerner, J.), dated January 7, 1994, as, upon reargument, adhered to a prior determination compelling him to respond to items 9 (g) through 9 (l) and items 10 (a) through 10 (e) of the plaintiffs "combined demands” for discovery.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The items of the plaintiffs combined discovery demands at issue on this appeal are material and necessary to the prosecution of the action and, therefore, should be disclosed (see, CPLR 3101 [a]; Allen v Crowell-Collier Publ. Co., 21 NY2d 403). Bracken, J. P., Rosenblatt, Krausman and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

215 A.D.2d 650, 628 N.Y.S.2d 503, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5487, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/whelton-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack