Legal Opinion
Scinta v. Van Coevering
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided April 29, 1998PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
—Order unanimously modified on the law and as modified affirmed without costs in accordance with the following Memorandum: Kathleen J. Van Coevering, administratrix of the estate of decedent doctor (defendant), contends that Supreme Court erred in ordering her to comply with plaintiffs’ request to disclose decedent’s medical and psychiatric records. In seeking to inspect those records, plaintiffs had to demonstrate that decedent’s physical or medical condition at the time of the alleged malpractice is “in controversy” (Dillenbeck v Hess, 73 NY2d 278, 287; see, Navedo v Nichols, 233 AD2d 378).…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Koump v. SmithNew York Court of Appeals · 1969
- Dillenbeck v. HessNew York Court of Appeals · 1989
- Navedo v. NicholsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1996
- State v. General Electric Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994
- Williams v. McGintyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994
3Cited by4 opinions
- Scinta v. Van CoeveringAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2001
- Grafi v. SolomonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2000
- Woodarek v. MaronAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2003
- Joyner v. Oakfield Alabama Central School DistrictAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2001