Hunt v. Ryzman
Cases that cite this one
6 later published cases cite this decision.
- Arad v. Hanza, LLC (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2013)
- Arad v. Hanza, LLC (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2013)
- Logan v. Roman (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2009)
- Lucian v. Schwartz (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2008)
- Butler v. Grimes (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2007)
- Malanga v. City of New York (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2002)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Orange County (Peter C. Patsalos, J.),
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.
Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the trial court properly permitted the plaintiff’s treating physicians to testify at trial, notwithstanding the plaintiff’s failure to provide him with information regarding those physicians pursuant to CPLR 3101 (d) (1) (i). It is well settled that the disclosure requirements of CPLR 3101 (d) (1) (i) do not apply to treating physicians (see, Mantuano v Mehale, 258 AD2d 566; Overeem v Neuhoff, 254 AD2d 398).
The trial court properly refused to charge the jury with respect to Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1180 (a), as there was no evidence that the plaintiff was traveling at an unreasonable or imprudent speed at the time of the accident (see, Putnam v Lamoreaux, 59 AD2d 974).
The defendant’s remaining contention is without merit. Prudenti, P.J., Santucci, Florio and Friedmann, JJ., concur.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.