Montag v. Young Men's Christian Ass'n
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
— Order unanimously affirmed, with costs. Memorandum: Special Term properly denied defendant’s motion to compel plaintiff to authorize production of her attending physicians’ records, reports, bills, notes and memoranda. We do not read Hoenig v Westpfial (52 NY2d 605) as requiring disclosure of the items sought by defendant. In each of the two cases decided in Hoenig, defendant sought the reports of plaintiffs’ attending physicians. Plaintiffs resisted on the ground that, inasmuch as no exchange of medical information had been requested, reports were not required under CPLR 3121 (subd [b])…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Hoenig v. WestphalNew York Court of Appeals · 1981
- Pizzo v. BunoraAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1982
- Ryan v. HaskellAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1982
3Cited by2 opinions
- Hostler v. Tonawanda Super Duper, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1984
- Salzman v. AndersenAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1983