Matter of Kufeld

Decision Date08 May 2008
Docket Number3627.,3628.
Citation51 A.D.3d 483,2008 NY Slip Op 04287,859 N.Y.S.2d 119
PartiesIn the Matter of the Appointment of a Guardian of the Person and Property for BERNARD KUFELD, an Alleged Incapacitated Person. MICHAEL PESKOWITZ, Appellant, v. BERNARD KUFELD, Respondent. MICHAEL PESKOWITZ, Respondent, v. BERNARD KUFELD, Appellant.
CourtNew York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

In this guardianship proceeding, the IAS court providently exercised its discretion in granting the court evaluator's application to review the medical records of Kufeld, the alleged incapacitated person (AIP), notwithstanding the physician-patient privilege (see Mental Hygiene Law § 81.09 [d]). Given the assertions of incapacity in the AIP's self-petition, which was subsequently withdrawn, and the original court evaluator's report, as well as the allegations, in the affidavits of the AIP's nephew (Peskowitz) and driver, of duress and coercion directed against the AIP, the court properly determined that "such records are likely to contain information which will assist the court evaluator in completing his or her report to the court" (id.; see Matter of Daniel TT., 39 AD3d 94, 98 [2007]). Although such records may not be admissible at a hearing due to the physician-patient privilege unless the AIP has affirmatively placed his medical condition in issue (see Matter of Rosa B.-S. [William M.B.], 1 AD3d 355, 356 [2003]; Matter of Q.E.J., 14 Misc 3d 448 [2006]), the privilege is nonetheless waived when a court evaluator seeks to review the records under section 81.09 (d) (see People v Sinski, 88 NY2d 487, 491-492 [1996]). While the original court evaluator did not testify and was not subject to cross-examination, the IAS court did not err in considering the original court evaluator's report, which was...

To continue reading

Request your trial
1 cases
  • In re S.B.
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court
    • 15 de junho de 2018
    ...144 (2d Dept. 2012). MHL § 81.09(c)(7) neither prohibits nor mandates Court ordered medical examinations. Matter of Kufeld , 51 A.D.3d 483, 484, 859 N.Y.S.2d 119 (1st Dept. 2008). Article 81 and case law is silent on whether an AIP can be compelled to undergo a medical evaluation, if recomm......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT