AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

DANIEL LARUSSO et al., Appellants, v. BROOKSTONE, INC., Respondent, and SALVATORE RIZZO, Appellant.

Ordered that the appeal by the plaintiffs is dismissed as abandoned ( see 22 NYCRR 670.8 [e]); and it is further,

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law and the facts, and the motion by the defendant Brookstone, Inc., for a protective order is denied; and it is further,

Ordered that one bill of costs is awarded to the defendant Salvatore Rizzo payable by the defendant Brookstone, Inc.

Generally, when a party to the action is to be deposed, the deposition should take place "within the county . . . where the action is pending" (CPLR 3110). An exception to this rule is where a party demonstrates that examination in that county would cause "undue hardship" ( Rodriguez v Infinity Ins. Co., 283 AD2d 969, 970; Farrakhan v N.Y.P. Holdings, 226 AD2d 133, 135; cf. Rogovin v Rogovin, 3 AD3d 352; Hoffman v Kraus, 260 AD2d 435, 437). In this case, the defendant Brookstone, Inc., which is headquartered in Merrimack, New Hampshire, failed to demonstrate that the appearance for a deposition in Suffolk County constituted an undue hardship. Therefore, it was not entitled to a protective order.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

LARUSSO v. BROOKSTONE
(Jun 10, 2008)