The motion court providently exercised its discretion by permitting defendants to conduct further IMEs post-note of issue, while leaving the case on the trial calendar. The record supports the court's findings that defendants would be prejudiced by an inability to gain discovery into the effects of a 2014 car accident on plaintiff's preexisting injuries, and that, conversely, the post-note of issue discovery would not prejudice plaintiff (see Cabrera v Abaev,
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Let's get started
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
HICKEY v. CITY OF NEW YORK
6004N 150139/10.
159 A.D.3d 511 (2018)
70 N.Y.S.3d 32
2018 NY Slip Op 01650
DAVID HICKEY, Appellant, v. CITY OF NEW YORK et al., Respondents.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
Decided March 15, 2018.
Decided March 15, 2018.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department.
Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.
Cited Cases
- No Cases Found
Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.
