Yoon Kim v. New York State Health Department

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Yoon Kim v. New York State Health Department

262 A.D.2d 156, 691 N.Y.S.2d 499, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6744

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

DecidedJune 15, 1999

StatusPublished

This text of 262 A.D.2d 156 (Yoon Kim v. New York State Health Department) 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

Yoon Kim v. New York State Health Department, 262 A.D.2d 156, 691 N.Y.S.2d 499, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6744 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Barbara Kapnick, J.), entered September 4, 1998, which denied plaintiff’s motion for a default judgment as against the individual defendants, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

A default judgment was properly denied as against the individual defendants because, among other reasons, they were never personally served with process in accordance with CPLR 307 (see, Matter of Spodek v New York State Commr. of Taxation & Fin., 85 NY2d 760, 766; Dreger v New York State Thruway Auth., 81 NY2d 721, 724), and the materials plaintiff seeks may be confidential under Public Health Law § 230 (9), (10) and (11) and § 2805-m (see, Atkins v Guest, 201 AD2d 411). We would also note that the individual defendants do not personally possess the agency defendant’s records in issue, and that plaintiff’s dispute appears to be with the agency, which answered in timely fashion. Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Tom, Saxe and Buckley, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Barbara Kapnick, J.), entered September 4, 1998, which denied plaintiff’s motion for a default judgment as against the individual defendants, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

A default judgment was properly denied as against the individual defendants because, among other reasons, they were never personally served with process in accordance with CPLR 307 (see, Matter of Spodek v New York State Commr. of Taxation & Fin., 85 NY2d 760, 766; Dreger v New York State Thruway Auth., 81 NY2d 721, 724), and the materials plaintiff seeks may be confidential under Public Health Law § 230 (9), (10) and (11) and § 2805-m (see, Atkins v Guest, 201 AD2d 411). We would also note that the individual defendants do not personally possess the agency defendant’s records in issue, and that plaintiff’s dispute appears to be with the agency, which answered in timely fashion. Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Tom, Saxe and Buckley, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

262 A.D.2d 156, 691 N.Y.S.2d 499, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6744, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/yoon-kim-v-new-york-state-health-department-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack