Legal Opinion

Baum v. Nussenbaum

New York Supreme Court

Decided November 7, 1958PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJoseph M. Conroy, J.

Motion by plaintiff for a discovery and inspection of the records and report of a physical examination made of the plaintiff by the defendant’s doctor. The physical examination was had on plaintiff’s consent and without the necessity for a court order.

*475In this Department, it has long been the custom to require a copy of the doctor’s report to be furnished to the party examined where the examination was made pursuant to a court order (Di Salvo v. Di Giacomo, 2 Misc 2d 1068), but not when the examination was granted voluntarily (Andrews v. Ghikas, 278 App. Div. 658). More recently, however,…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Totoritus v. StefanNew York Supreme Court · 1958
  2. Andrews v. GhikasAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1951
  3. Di Salvo v. Di GiacomoNew York Supreme Court · 1956

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Otten v. Melbros Construction Co.New York Supreme Court · 1959
  2. Chiarani v. ManiscalcoNew York Supreme Court · 1960
  3. Donovan v. Albano Trucking Corp.New York Supreme Court · 1959

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API