Daly v. Genovese
| Decision Date | 06 September 1983 |
| Citation | 466 N.Y.S.2d 428,96 A.D.2d 1027 |
| Parties | Edward DALY, M.D., Respondent, v. Matthew GENOVESE, M.D., Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Clark, Gagliardi & Miller, P.C., White Plains (Lawrence T. D'Aloise, Jr., White Plains, of counsel), for appellant.
Greenspan & Jaffe, White Plains (Joseph D. DeSalvo, White Plains, of counsel), for respondent.
Before MOLLEN, P.J., and TITONE, WEINSTEIN and RUBIN, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
In a defamation action, defendant Matthew Genovese appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, dated January 11, 1983, as granted plaintiff's motion pursuant to CPLR 3124 directing a nonparty witness to answer certain questions propounded to him at a prior examination before trial.
Leave to appeal is granted by Presiding Justice MOLLEN.
Order reversed insofar as appealed from, with costs, and plaintiff's motion denied.
No appeal as of right lies from an order directing a party to answer questions propounded at an examination before trial (see Matter of Gambardella, 81 A.D.2d 835, 438 N.Y.S.2d 836; Aronofsky v. Marine Park Chiropractic Center, 81 A.D.2d 570, 437 N.Y.S.2d 422; Rockwood Nat. Corp. v. Peat, Marwick, Mitchell & Co., 59 A.D.2d 573). The same is true, a fortiori, when such an order is directed at a nonparty witness. However, under the circumstances of this case, leave to appeal is granted pursuant to CPLR 5701 (subd. [c] ) because of the novel question of statutory interpretation presented by this appeal.
It is clear that statements made in the course of peer committee review proceedings by individual parties to a medical malpractice action, regarding the subject matter of that action, are discoverable when the subject matter of the action was reviewed at the meeting. (See Education Law, § 6527, subd. 3; Carroll v. St. Luke's Hosp. of Newburgh, 91 A.D.2d 674, 457 N.Y.S.2d 128; Lenard v. New York Univ. Med. Center [Univ. Hosp.], 83 A.D.2d 860 442 N.Y.S.2d 30; Larsson v. Mithallal, 72 A.D.2d 806, 421 N.Y.S.2d 922.) However, that exception to the statutory privilege does not apply in a defamation action, where the subject matter of the action is the allegedly slanderous statements made at the meeting, and not the alleged malpractice which was reviewed thereat. Accordingly, the allegedly slanderous statements made by defendant concerning plaintiff, in the course of a peer committee review proceeding, are exempted...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Scalone v. Phelps Memorial Hosp. Center
...as of right lies from an order directing a party to answer questions propounded at an examination before trial (see, Daly v. Genovese, 96 A.D.2d 1027, 466 N.Y.S.2d 428; Hughson v. St. Francis Hosp., 93 A.D.2d 491, 495, 463 N.Y.S.2d 224; Matter of Beeman, 108 A.D.2d 1010, 1011, 485 N.Y.S.2d ......
-
Tartaglia v. Paul Revere Life Ins. Co., M 8-85.
...hospital, or against Dr. Tartaglia in his professional capacity. The third case cited by Staten Island — Daly v. Genovese, 96 A.D.2d 1027, 466 N.Y.S.2d 428 (N.Y.App.Div., 2d Dep't 1983) — involved an action for defamation between two physicians based upon allegedly slanderous statements mad......
-
Shapiro v. Central General Hosp., Inc.
...Dolan, 149 A.D.2d 799, 540 N.Y.S.2d 21; Matter of Broome County Med. Socy. v. Guest, 122 A.D.2d 527, 504 N.Y.S.2d 907; Daly v. Genovese, 96 A.D.2d 1027, 466 N.Y.S.2d 428). The foregoing discovery requests, most of which are also generalized and overbroad, clearly seek disclosure of material......
-
Swartzenberg v. Trivedi
...that statement would be subject to disclosure (see, Carroll v. Nunez, 137 A.D.2d 911, 912-913, 524 N.Y.S.2d 578; Daly v. Genovese, 96 A.D.2d 1027, 466 N.Y.S.2d 428, appeal dismissed 61 N.Y.2d 604, 473 N.Y.S.2d 1025, 462 N.E.2d 155; De Paolo v. Wisoff, 94 A.D.2d 694, 694-695, 461 N.Y.S.2d 89......