AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
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
Judges

LAWRENCE J. MERTZ et al., Respondents-Appellants, v. HILARY P. BRADFORD et al., Appellants-Respondents.

Order unanimously reversed on the law without costs and defendants' motion granted. Memorandum: Plaintiffs failed to demonstrate special circumstances warranting the presence of either a medical representative or a stenographer at physical examinations to be conducted by doctors designated for that purpose by defendants. We repeat that the examining room should not "`be turned into a hearing room with lawyers and stenographers from both sides participating'" (Casali v Phillips, 145 A.D.2d 941, 942, quoting Jakubowski v Lengen, 86 A.D.2d 398, 401). We also repeat that "where valid reasons exist, a party may object to the physician designated by defendant and seek to have defendant select another doctor to conduct the examination" (Casali v Phillips, supra, at 942; see also, Rosenblitt v Rosenblitt, 107 A.D.2d 292, 295).

Finally, we note that while plaintiffs purport to appeal from an order denying their motion to permit the presence of their attorney at the physical examinations, no such order appears in the record. The attorney may attend (see, Jakubowski v Lengen, supra).

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

MERTZ v. BRADFORD
(Jul 12, 1989)