PRECISION CHIROPRACTIC PC v. MVAIC (2020)

Order (Bianka Perez, J.), entered December 6, 2018, insofar as appealed from, affirmed, with $10 costs. Where a party fails to timely object to discovery demands within the 20—day periods prescribed by CPLR article 31 (see CPLR 3122[a]; 3133[a] ), appellate review is limited to determining whether the requested material is privileged under CPLR 3101 or the demand is palpably improper (see LaBuda v. LaBuda, 175 AD3d 39, 44 [2019]; Anonymous v. High School for Envtl. Studies, 32 AD3d 353, 358-359 [2006]).

Here, defendant did not timely or otherwise object to plaintiff's discovery demands and, in fact, ignored them. Upon plaintiff's motion to compel discovery made several months later, defendant's sole argument in opposition was that the requested discovery is “moot.” Since defendant did not argue below that the discovery requested was privileged or palpably improper, we have no cause to disturb Civil Court's grant of plaintiff's motion.

Defendant's present objections to the requested discovery are raised for the first time on appeal, and are not properly before us (see 324 E. 9th St. Corp. v. Acordia Northeast-N.Y., 29 AD3d 367 [2006]).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.

Per Curiam.