Legal Opinion

Mertz v. Bradford

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided July 12, 1989PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Order unanimously reversed on the law without costs and defendants’ motion granted. Memorandum: Plaintiffs failed to demonstrate special circumstances warranting the presence of either a medical representative or a stenographer at physical examinations to be conducted by doctors designated for that purpose by defendants. We repeat that the examining room should not " 'be turned into a hearing room with lawyers and *963stenographers from both sides participating’ ” (Casali v Phillips, 145 AD2d 941, 942, quoting Jakubowski v Lengen, 86 AD2d 398, 401). We also repeat that "where valid reasons exist,…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Rosenblitt v. RosenblittAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1985
  2. Jakubowski v. LengenAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1982
  3. Casali v. PhillipsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1988

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Grady v. PhillipsNew York Supreme Court · 1993
  2. Kattaria v. RosadoAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2017
  3. Kosanovich v. GrecaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990

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

Powered by the Exa API