KASHELKAR v. William A. Sandback, Esq., et al., Defendants-Respondents. (2006)

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.

Ashok KASHELKAR, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Rita DAVE, Esq., et al., Defendants, William A. Sandback, Esq., et al., Defendants-Respondents.

Decided: July 27, 2006

BUCKLEY, P.J., SULLIVAN, WILLIAMS, CATTERSON, McGUIRE, JJ.

Ashok Kashelkar, appellant pro se. Sandback, Birnbaum & Michelen, Mineola (Oscar Michelen of counsel), for respondents.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Richard F. Braun, J.), entered January 31, 2003, which partially granted the Sandback defendants' motion for a protective order, and order, same court and Justice, entered June 24, 2003, which removed the action to Civil Court, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff's notice to admit was properly vacated as it improperly sought information about the existence of insurance, a matter that has nothing to do with the elements of plaintiff's claims herein for civil rights and RICO violations (see Wolin v. St. Vincent's Hosp. & Med. Ctr., 304 A.D.2d 348, 757 N.Y.S.2d 33 [2003] ). Our review of the record indicates that the stricken discovery demands were overly broad and burdensome. The motion court had authority to remove the action Civil Court without the parties' consent (CPLR 325[d]; 22 NYCRR 202.13[a] ).

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network