Legal Opinion
Tucker v. Bay Shore Storage Warehouse, Inc.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided January 5, 2010PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Contrary to the defendants’ contentions, the Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying that branch of their motion which was to compel the plaintiff to undergo a second independent medical examination. “The supervision of disclosure and the setting of reasonable terms and conditions therefor rests within the sound discretion of the *610trial court and, absent an improvident exercise of that discretion, its determination will not be disturbed” (Mattocks v White Motor Corp., 258 AD2d 628, 629 [1999] [citations omitted]; see Kaplan v Herbstein, 175 AD2d 200 [1991]).…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Storrar v. Board of EducationAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1999
- Kaplan v. HerbsteinAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1991
- Young v. KalowAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1995
- Huggins v. New York City Transit AuthorityAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1996
3Cited by8 opinions
- DANIELS, ERICA v. RUMSEY, FRANCES A.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013
- Bravo v. VargasAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014
- Orsos v. Hudson Transit Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
- Guerra v. McBeanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2015
- Bravo v. VargasAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.