Legal Opinion

Fiorentino v. Jaques

New York Supreme Court

Decided January 17, 1964PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMario Pittoni, J.

In this action to recover damages for professional malpractice, the plaintiffs move to strike out the answer of the defendant, Dr. Kugler, upon the ground that he has willfully refused to answer interrogatories propounded pursuant to rule 3134 of the Civil Practice Law and Rules.

The application is opposed upon the ground that the plaintiffs were not entitled to the procedural disclosure device in the first instance (CPLR 3130), since the statute limits this method of disclosure to actions “ other than in an action to recover damages for * * * a personal injury, resulting from negligence, or…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Robins v. FinestoneNew York Court of Appeals · 1955

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Patterson v. Jewish Hospital & Medical CenterNew York Supreme Court · 1978
  2. Rothholz v. Chrysler Corp.New York Supreme Court · 1970
  3. Charlotte Lake River Associates v. American InsuranceNew York Supreme Court · 1978

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

Powered by the Exa API