At page 480 Entitlement to discovery regarding injury causation9 citing casesaffirming Supreme Court's order requiring the plaintiff to provide authorizations as the plaintiff claimed that "the subject accident aggravated or exacerbated underlying conditions that were asymptomatic before the accident
- DiMaggio v. Port Auth. of N.Y. & N.J., 2024 NY Slip Op 03080 (N.Y. App. Div. 1st Dep't 2024).publishedSince Salvatore alleges that the accident aggravated or exacerbated preexisting injuries, the authorizations should be unrestricted by date ( see McGlone v Port Auth. of N.Y. & N.J. , 90 AD3d 479, 480 [1st Dept 2011]).
- Joseph v. Edun, 2023 NY Slip Op 00238 (N.Y. App. Div. 1st Dep't 2023).published Defendants are therefore entitled to determine the extent, if any, that plaintiff's claimed injuries are attributable to accidents other than the one underlying this action ( McGlone v Port Auth. of N.Y. & N.J. , 90 AD3d 479, 480 [1st Dept…
- Rom v. Eurostruct, Inc., 179 A.D.3d 418 (N.Y. App. Div. 1st Dep't 2020).publishedFurthermore, plaintiff's claims of aggravation and exacerbation of a preexisting, latent, and asymptomatic degenerative condition entitled defendants to authorizations unrestricted by date ( see McGlone v Port Auth. of N.Y. & N.J. , 90 AD3…
- Brito v. Gomez, 2018 NY Slip Op 8105 (N.Y. App. Div. 1st Dep't 2018).published(affirming Supreme Court's order requiring the plaintiff to provide authorizations as the plaintiff claimed that "the subject accident aggravated or exacerbated underlying conditions that were asymptomatic before the acc…)
- Gutierrez v. Trillium USA, 111 A.D.3d 669 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep't 2013).published Here, the defendants’ request for authorizations for the release of the plaintiffs medical records for the five-year period prior to the accident sought information that was material and necessary to the defense of the action, given the pl…
- Colwin v. Katz, 102 A.D.3d 449 (N.Y. App. Div. 1st Dep't 2013).published Inasmuch as plaintiff has clearly voluntarily put her prior medical condition at issue (CPLR 4504 [a]; see Dillenbeck v Hess, 73 NY2d 278, 283-284 [1989]), such disclosure is material and necessary for the defense of this action so that de…
Other citing cases
- Frawley v. City of New York, 2023 NY Slip Op 06124 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep't 2023).published
- Rubio v. New York City Transit Auth., 99 A.D.3d 532 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012).published
v.
Port Authority of New York and New Jersey
[*480] Although defendants did not timely comply with prior court-ordered deadlines, the record supports the motion court’s determination that they substantially complied with their disclosure obligations and that any failure to comply was not wilful, contumacious or in bad faith (see Perez v New York City Tr. Auth., 73 AD3d 529, 530 [2010]; Banner v New York City Hous. Auth., 73 AD3d 502, 503 [2010]).
The court also properly directed plaintiff to provide authorizations for all medical records unrestricted by date as sought by defendants in prior discovery requests. Plaintiff averred in his bill of particulars that the injuries he allegedly sustained as a result of the subject accident aggravated or exacerbated underlying conditions that were asymptomatic before the accident, and that he was disabled as a result. In light of his averments, plaintiff voluntarily placed his physical condition in issue; therefore, defendants are entitled to discovery to determine the extent, if any, that plaintiffs claimed injuries “are attributable to accidents other than the one at issue here” (Rega v Avon Prods., Inc., 49 AD3d 329, 330 [2008]; cf. Noble v Ackerman, 216 AD2d 140 [1995]). Concur — Gonzalez, EJ., Friedman, Moskowitz, Acosta and Richter, JJ.
Motion to strike portions of respondents’ brief referring to matters dehors the record granted.