Defendants' claim that plaintiffs' motion to preclude was untimely was not raised before the motion court and as a consequence is not preserved for appellate review. Defendants' contention that the two-page letter from their examining physician dated June 8, 1998 fully comports with the requirements for medical reports set forth in 22 NYCRR 202.17 (b) (1) is belied by the text of the letter, which clearly indicates that the letter was simply a cover for an enclosed "copy...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.