McFARLANE v. COUNTY OF SUFFOLK (2009)

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for assault and battery, false arrest, and false imprisonment, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Rebolini, J.), dated June 16, 2008, which denied their motion to compel the plaintiff to fully respond to their notice for discovery and inspection by furnishing authorizations for certain medical records.

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the defendants' contention, the Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its broad discretion in denying their motion to compel the plaintiff to furnish the requested authorizations for certain medical records (see generally Gilman & Ciocia, Inc. v. Walsh, 45 A.D.3d 531, 845 N.Y.S.2d 124;  Walsh v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 289 A.D.2d 842, 734 N.Y.S.2d 710).   The court properly determined that the records sought by the defendants were totally unrelated to the plaintiff's claims and the injuries sued upon, so the plaintiff did not waive the physician-patient privilege with regard to those records (see generally Wojtusiak v. Elardo, 43 A.D.3d 436, 840 N.Y.S.2d 626;  Sadicario v. Stylebuilt Accessories, 250 A.D.2d 830, 673 N.Y.S.2d 697;  Zappi v. Pedigree Ski Shop, 244 A.D.2d 331, 664 N.Y.S.2d 57).