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.
Peter FERREIRA, respondent, v. VILLAGE OF KINGS POINT, appellant, et al., defendant.
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant Village of Kings Point appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Martin, J.), entered June 19, 2008, which denied its motion pursuant to 22 NYCRR 202.21 to vacate the note of issue and certificate of readiness, and pursuant to CPLR 3124 to compel the plaintiff to comply with its discovery demands.
ORDERED that the order is reversed, on the law, the facts, and in the exercise of discretion, with costs, and the motion of the Village of Kings Point to vacate the note of issue and certificate of readiness and to compel the plaintiff to comply with its outstanding discovery is granted.
The plaintiff's certificate of readiness incorrectly stated that all pretrial discovery, including physical examinations, had been completed. Inasmuch as this was a misstatement of a material fact, that branch of the motion of the appellant Village of Kings Point which was to vacate the note of issue and certificate of readiness should have been granted (see 22 NYCRR 202.21[e]; Brown v. Astoria Fed. Sav., 51 A.D.3d 961, 962, 858 N.Y.S.2d 793; Gregory v. Ford Motor Credit Co., 298 A.D.2d 496, 497, 748 N.Y.S.2d 507; Spilky v. TRW, Inc., 225 A.D.2d 539, 540, 638 N.Y.S.2d 792; Carte v. Segall, 134 A.D.2d 396, 520 N.Y.S.2d 943).
Furthermore, the unopposed branch of the appellant's motion which was to compel the plaintiff to comply with its discovery demands should have been granted (see Kalish v. Manhasset Med. Ctr. Hosp., 100 A.D.2d 507, 508, 472 N.Y.S.2d 714).
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: November 25, 2008
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second 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)