Francklin v New York El. Co., Inc.

Francklin v New York El. Co., Inc. 2007 NY Slip Op 02042 [38 AD3d 329] March 15, 2007 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. As corrected through Wednesday, May 9, 2007

Gerald Francklin et al., Respondents,
v
New York Elevator Company, Inc., Appellant.

—[*1] Geringer & Dolan LLP, New York (Randi L. Breitner and John T. McNamara of counsel), for appellant.

Thomas Torto, New York, for respondents.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Joan A. Madden, J.), entered May 18, 2006, which, in an action for personal injuries allegedly caused by an elevator malfunction, after an in camera inspection, directed defendant elevator maintenance company to disclose all of its maintenance and repair records concerning the subject elevator for the six-month period following the accident, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The subject records of postaccident repairs are discoverable (see Longo v Armor El. Co., 278 AD2d 127, 129 [2000]), subject to the proviso that they are not to be introduced at trial except upon a showing of relevance to the condition of the elevator at the time of the accident, and only if introduced in a way that does not reveal that repairs were made (see Giannelli v Montgomery Kone, Inc., 175 Misc 2d 32, 34 [1997]). Concur—Tom, J.P., Sullivan, Williams, Buckley and Malone, JJ.