Wilson v. Simpson W. Realty, LLC

2020 NY Slip Op 53, 113 N.Y.S.3d 533, 179 A.D.3d 417
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJanuary 2, 2020
Docket10696N 21764/16E
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 2020 NY Slip Op 53 (Wilson v. Simpson W. Realty, LLC) 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
Wilson v. Simpson W. Realty, LLC, 2020 NY Slip Op 53, 113 N.Y.S.3d 533, 179 A.D.3d 417 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2020).

Opinion

Wilson v Simpson W. Realty, LLC (2020 NY Slip Op 00053)
Wilson v Simpson W. Realty, LLC
2020 NY Slip Op 00053
Decided on January 2, 2020
Appellate Division, First Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.


Decided on January 2, 2020
Richter, J.P., Gische, Mazzarelli, Gesmer, JJ.

10696N 21764/16E

[*1] Dorothea Wilson, Plaintiff-Respondent,

v

Simpson West Realty, LLC, Defendant, The Alhambra Ballroom, Inc., Defendant-Appellant.


Cascone & Kluepfel, LLP, Garden City (Pamela Wolff Cohen of counsel), for appellant.

Arnold E. DiJoseph, P.C., New York (Arnold E. DiJoseph III of counsel), for respondent.



Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Laura Douglas, J.), entered December 5, 2018, which granted the motion of defendant The Alhambra Ballroom, Inc. to compel plaintiff to comply with certain discovery demands concerning medical and employment records to the extent of directing plaintiff to provide authorizations with respect to her 2008 and 2017 knee replacements, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court providently exercised its discretion by denying defendant's motion to compel production of plaintiff's entire employment file for a three-year period prior to her accident. Discovery of plaintiff's entire employment file would have been overly broad and was not material or necessary to her claims that she had a traumatic brain injury, where she testified that she was informed by her employer that she was not improperly performing her work duties as a result of her accident (see Almonte v Mancuso, 132 AD3d 529 [1st Dept 2015]). To the extent that plaintiff claimed that as a result of the accident she had impaired instability and balance, disclosure of records regarding her two knee replacements was appropriate, as they are sufficiently related to that claim (see Allen v Crowell-Collier Publ. Co., 21 NY3d 403, 406-407 [1968]).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER

OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.

ENTERED: JANUARY 2, 2020

CLERK



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

Related

Villanueva v. J.T. Magen & Co. Inc.
216 A.D.3d 604 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2023)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2020 NY Slip Op 53, 113 N.Y.S.3d 533, 179 A.D.3d 417, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wilson-v-simpson-w-realty-llc-nyappdiv-2020.