DiMichel v. South Buffalo Railway Co.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
— Order modified on the law and as modified affirmed without costs, in accordance with the following Memorandum: The court ordered defendant to provide to plaintiff for inspection and copying all videotapes and/ or surveillance films of plaintiff. We agree that such materials generally are discoverable (see, Marte v Hickok Mfg. Co., 154 AD2d 173). That order is modified, however, to the extent that defendant must provide to plaintiff those surveillance materials it intends to use at trial, and is precluded from using any *915surveillance material that it does not supply to plaintiff within 60…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Allen v. Crowell-Collier Publishing Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1968
- Saccente v. ToterhiAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1970
- Marte v. W.O. Hickok Mfg. Co., Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990
- Xerox Corp. v. SangerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1984
3Cited by6 opinions
- DiMichel v. South Buffalo Railway Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1992
- Kane v. Her-Pet Refrigeration, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992
- Jannello v. ParkerNew York Supreme Court · 1995
- Baird v. CampbellNew York Supreme Court · 1992
- Poole v. Consolidated Rail Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1991
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.