Ceballos v. N.Y.C. Hous. Auth.

• Decision Date: 26 June 2019
• Docket Number: 2016–12793,Index No. 711262/15
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
• Parties: Johnny CEBALLOS, Appellant, v. NEW YORK CITY HOUSING AUTHORITY, Respondent, et al., Defendant.

173 A.D.3d 1132
104 N.Y.S.3d 177

Johnny CEBALLOS, Appellant,
v.
NEW YORK CITY HOUSING AUTHORITY, Respondent, et al., Defendant.

2016–12793
Index No. 711262/15

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

Submitted January 24, 2019
June 26, 2019

104 N.Y.S.3d 178

Law Offices of John P. Grill, P.C., Carmel, NY, for appellant.

Newman Myers Kreines Gross Harris, P.C. (Wilson, Elser, Moskowitz, Edelman & Dicker, LLP, New York, N.Y. [Judy C. Selmeci ], of counsel), for respondent.

REINALDO E. RIVERA, J.P., RUTH C. BALKIN, LEONARD B. AUSTIN, ROBERT J. MILLER, JJ.

DECISION & ORDER

173 A.D.3d 1132

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Robert L. Nahman, J.), entered December 2, 2016. The order, insofar as appealed from, denied, as academic, that branch of the plaintiff's motion which was to compel the defendant New York City Housing Authority to respond to certain discovery demands, and granted those branches of the cross motion of the defendant New York City Housing Authority which were for a protective order with respect to discovery demands 5 and 6.

ORDERED that the order is modified, on the facts and in the exercise of discretion, (1) by deleting the provision thereof denying, as academic, that branch of the plaintiff's motion which was to compel the defendant New York City Housing Authority to respond to certain discovery demands, and substituting therefor a provision granting that branch of the plaintiff's motion which was to compel a response to discovery demand 5, and denying those branches of the plaintiff's motion which were to compel responses to discovery demands 1, 2, 3, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, and 13, and (2) by deleting the provision thereof

173 A.D.3d 1133

granting that branch of the cross motion of the defendant New York City Housing Authority which was for a protective order

104 N.Y.S.3d 179

with respect to discovery demand 5, and substituting therefor a provision denying that branch of the cross motion; as so modified, the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs to the defendant New York City Housing Authority.

The...