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.
IN RE: NEW YORK CENTRAL MUTUAL FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, appellant, v. Sharon L. SERPICO, respondent; et al., proposed additional respondents.
In a proceeding, inter alia, pursuant to CPLR article 75 to temporarily stay arbitration of an uninsured motorist claim to allow for discovery in aid of arbitration, the petitioner appeals, as limited by its brief, from stated portions of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Alpert, J.), dated May 22, 2006, which, inter alia, denied that branch of its motion which was to direct the respondent to provide all medical authorizations for the medical records and reports relative to the subject accident and two prior automobile accidents.
ORDERED that the order is modified, on the facts and in the exercise of discretion, by deleting the provision thereof denying that branch of the petitioner's motion which was to direct the respondent to provide all medical authorizations for the medical records and reports relating to the subject accident and two prior automobile accidents and substituting therefor a provision granting that branch of the motion; as so modified, the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs to the appellant.
The Supreme Court improvidently exercised its discretion in denying that branch of the petitioner's motion which was to direct the respondent to provide all medical authorizations to obtain relevant medical reports and copies of relevant medical records pertaining to those bodily injuries that the respondent claims to have sustained as a result of the subject motor vehicle accident, including medical reports and medical records pertaining to bodily injuries sustained before the subject accident occurred which were similar to those allegedly sustained in the subject accident (see CPLR 3102 [c]; Matter of State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Bautista, 11 A.D.3d 471, 782 N.Y.S.2d 372; Matter of Allstate Ins. Co. v. Moya, 288 A.D.2d 309, 732 N.Y.S.2d 890; Matter of Allstate Ins. Co. v. Baez, 269 A.D.2d 392, 702 N.Y.S.2d 878).
The appellant's remaining contentions are without merit.
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 07, 2007
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)