Chester v. Zima
| Decision Date | 03 January 1964 |
| Citation | 246 N.Y.S.2d 144,41 Misc.2d 676 |
| Parties | Mary Ann CHESTER and Robert M. Chester, Plaintiffs, v. Sharon ZIMA and Raymond Zima, Joseph Stern and A. C. E. Freight, Inc., Defendants. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court |
Ralph M. Hornlein, Buffalo, for plaintiffs.
Smith, Murphy & Schoepperle, Buffalo (Thomas W. Steffan, Buffalo, of counsel), for defendants Zima.
Defendants served a notice requesting plaintiffs to execute and acknowledge a written authorization permitting the defendants to examine 'the records of all hospitals relating to the physical condition' of the plaintiff, Mary Ann Chester, pursuant to the provisions of Section 3121(a) of the CPLR.
Plaintiffs brought this motion pursuant to Rule 3122 of the CPLR for a protective order under Section 3103 of the CPLR to restrain the defendants from enforcing the demand for written authorization to examine and obtain copies of the hospital records on the grounds that such authorization and inspection would violate the doctor-patient privilege which existed under the Civil Practice Act and has been continued by Section 4504 CPLR.
A reading of the disclosure provisions of Article 31 of the CPLR indicates, I believe, a clear intention to open the door of pre-trial inquiry to the point where as much of the information material to the issues and normally in the sole possession or under the control of one party may be obtained by the other in the interests of truth and justice, to remove the element of surprise from litigation and to enable the litigants and the courts, at any proper stage of the litigation, to make a true evaluation of the merits of the cause and the rights of the parties.
In any circumstances where the disclosure would, in the Court's opinion, be such as to cause 'unreasonable annoyance, expense, embarrassment, disadvantage, or other prejudice to any person or the courts', the Court has broad discretionary power to limit the demand and inquiry and to suppress information obtained (Section 3103 CPLR).
The right given by Section 3121(a) for an examination of the hospital records is indicative of the trend towards full pretrial disclosure which, in my opinion, the provisions of Article 31 of the CPLR are intended to accomplish.
Where the plaintiff begins a lawsuit based on a claim for personal injuries, he removes himself from the protective provisions of Section 4504 CPLR as to doctors' reports in the hospital records at least to the point where h...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Adlerstein v. South Nassau Communities Hospital
...which otherwise insulates these matters. Koump v. Smith, 25 N.Y.2d 287, 303 N.Y.S.2d 858, 250 N.E.2d 857 (1969); Chester v. Zima, 41 Misc.2d 676, 246 N.Y.S.2d 144 (Sup.Ct.Erie Co.1964); Siegel, New York Civil Practice § The relevant statute governing such physical examination is CPLR 3121(a......
-
Koump v. Smith
...examine hospital records relating to those injuries (De Castro v. City of New York, 54 Misc.2d 1007, 284 N.Y.S.2d 281; Chester v. Zima, 41 Misc.2d 676, 246 N.Y.S.2d 144). In Fisher v. Fossett, 45 Misc.2d 757, 257 N.Y.S.2d 821 the same Judge who decided Chester v. Zima, Supra carried the rat......
-
Koump v. Smith
...record which relates to the defendant's physical condition (cf. Constantine v. Diello, 24 A.D.2d 821, 264 N.Y.S.2d 153; Chester v. Zima, 41 Misc.2d 676, 246 N.Y.S.2d 144; Fisher v. Fossett, 45 Misc.2d 757, 257 N.Y.S.2d ...
-
Hackbarth v. Schoeck
...pursuant to Civil Practice Law and Rules § 3101(a), (4). § 3101 proceedings should be construed liberally. C. f. Chester v. Zima, 41 Misc.2d 676, 246 N.Y.S.2d 144. The Courts have readily found special circumstances within the definition of the statute to permit non-party witnesses to be ex......