Careccia v. Enstrom
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Casey, J.
At issue on this appeal is whether videotapes which result from the surveillance of a personal injury plaintiff, conducted at the direction of defense counsel after commencement of the personal injury action, are discoverable upon demand by plaintiff. The First Department has held that such material must be produced upon demand, although disclosure "may properly be delayed until the party making the photograph, videotapes or movies has had the opportunity to depose fully the opposing party” (Marte v Hickok Mfg. Co., 154 AD2d 173, 177). We decline to follow the…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Sands v. News America Publishing Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990
- 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
- Thibodeau v. Rob Leasing, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1982
- Barber v. Town of NorthumberlandAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1982
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 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
- Lamitie v. Emerson Electric Company-White Rodgers DivisionAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994
- Grossman v. Emergency Cesspool & Sewer Cleaners, Inc.New York Supreme Court · 1994
- Barnes v. New York State Thruway AuthorityNew York Court of Claims · 1998
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.