September 10, 2008

Connely v Allstate Ins. Co. (2008 NY Slip Op 51874(U))

Headnote

The main issue in this case was whether the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County, erred in denying plaintiff's motion to compel the deposition of the defendant in an action to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits. The court held that under CPLR 3101 (a), parties to an action are entitled to reasonable discovery of any facts bearing on the controversy which will assist preparation for trial. The relevant facts considered by the court were the plaintiff's motion to compel the deposition of the defendant and the defendant's opposition to the motion. The holding of the court was that the order denying plaintiff's motion was reversed without costs and the motion was granted to the extent that the defendant was ordered to appear for a deposition within 30 days of the order entered.

Reported in New York Official Reports at Connely v Allstate Ins. Co. (2008 NY Slip Op 51874(U))

Connely v Allstate Ins. Co. (2008 NY Slip Op 51874(U)) [*1]
Connely v Allstate Ins. Co.
2008 NY Slip Op 51874(U) [20 Misc 3d 145(A)]
Decided on September 10, 2008
Appellate Term, Second Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.
Decided on September 10, 2008

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE TERM: 2nd and 11th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS


PRESENT: : PESCE, P.J., RIOS and STEINHARDT, JJ
2007-1806 K C.
Peter Connely, D.C. a/a/o Samuel Sejour, Appellant,

against

Allstate Insurance Company, Respondent.

Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County (Alan L. Lebowitz, J.H.O.), entered September 4, 2007. The order denied plaintiff’s motion, inter alia, to compel the deposition of defendant.

Order reversed without costs and plaintiff’s motion granted to the extent that defendant is ordered to appear for a deposition within 30 days of the order entered hereon.

In this action by a provider to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits, plaintiff moved to compel the deposition of defendant and for a conditional order striking defendant’s answer or precluding defendant from offering evidence at trial in the event
of defendant’s noncompliance. Defendant opposed the motion, which was denied. This appeal by plaintiff ensued.

CPLR 3101 (a) provides for full disclosure of all matter “material and necessary in the prosecution or defense of an action, regardless of the burden of proof.” Parties to an action are entitled to reasonable discovery “of any facts bearing on the controversy which will assist preparation for trial by sharpening the issues and reducing delay and prolixity” (Allen v Crowell-Collier Publ. Co., 21 NY2d 403, 406 [1968]). In view of the foregoing, plaintiff’s motion should have been granted to the extent of compelling defendant to appear for a deposition (see Crossbay Acupuncture, P.C. v State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 15 Misc 3d 110 [App Term, 2d & 11th Jud Dists 2007]).

Pesce, P.J., Rios and Steinhardt, JJ., concur. [*2]
Decision Date: September 10, 2008