Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Michael LEWIS, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Donald BAKER, et al., Defendants, Sears Roebuck and Company, Inc., Defendant-Appellant. [And Third-Party Actions].
Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Michael DeMarco, J.), entered September 2, 1999, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, denied defendant Sears Roebuck and Company, Inc.'s motion to delete so much of a prior order of the same court and Justice, dated May 25, 1999, which, sua sponte, directed the deposition of non-party Earl Records, unanimously reversed, on the law, the facts and in the exercise of discretion, without costs, the motion granted, and that part of the May 25, 1999 order directing the deposition of Mr. Records vacated.
There is no dispute that Mr. Records is a non-party to this action and a non-resident of this State, currently residing in Indiana. It is also clear that Mr. Records has not been served with a notice of deposition or a subpoena, and that plaintiff has not moved for a commission or letters rogatory. Indeed, unless Mr. Records voluntarily complies with a notice of deposition, if one is ever served, plaintiff's remedy lies within the mechanisms set forth in CPLR 3108 (see also, Wiseman v. American Motors Sales Corp., 103 A.D.2d 230, 235, 479 N.Y.S.2d 528). It was, however, at this juncture, an improvident exercise of discretion and beyond the court's authority to direct Mr. Records to appear in the Bronx County Courthouse for a deposition. We do not reach the issue of Mr. Records' purported status as an expert for defendant Sears Roebuck and Company.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: January 23, 2001
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)