Wong v. New York City Transit Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Wong v. New York City Transit Authority

126 A.D.2d 545, 510 N.Y.S.2d 667, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 41679

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

DecidedJanuary 12, 1987

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 126 A.D.2d 545 (Wong v. New York City Transit Authority) 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

Wong v. New York City Transit Authority, 126 A.D.2d 545, 510 N.Y.S.2d 667, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 41679 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1987).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Levine, J.), dated October 25, 1986, which denied her motion, inter alia, to compel the defendant to produce certain witnesses with personal knowledge of the accident for an examination before trial.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

Special Term (Vaccaro, J.), by order dated January 22, 1982, directed that an examination before trial of all parties was to be held on or about February 25, 1982. In April 1985 the appellant’s counsel moved to strike the defendant’s answer, or, in the alternative, to compel it to produce the dispatcher, conductor and motorman of the train involved in the accident. That motion was denied and this appeal ensued.

Special Term did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion, brought more than three years after the court-directed deposition date. Further, it is apparent that the only alleged employee of the defendant with personal knowledge is no longer employed by the defendant. Thompson, J. P., Niehoff, Weinstein, Kunzeman and Spatt, 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 (Levine, J.), dated October 25, 1986, which denied her motion, inter alia, to compel the defendant to produce certain witnesses with personal knowledge of the accident for an examination before trial.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

Special Term (Vaccaro, J.), by order dated January 22, 1982, directed that an examination before trial of all parties was to be held on or about February 25, 1982. In April 1985 the appellant’s counsel moved to strike the defendant’s answer, or, in the alternative, to compel it to produce the dispatcher, conductor and motorman of the train involved in the accident. That motion was denied and this appeal ensued.

Special Term did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion, brought more than three years after the court-directed deposition date. Further, it is apparent that the only alleged employee of the defendant with personal knowledge is no longer employed by the defendant. Thompson, J. P., Niehoff, Weinstein, Kunzeman and Spatt, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

126 A.D.2d 545, 510 N.Y.S.2d 667, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 41679, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wong-v-new-york-city-transit-authority-nyappdiv-1987.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack