Jenkins v Trustees of the Masonic Hall & Asylum Fund

Annotate this Case
Jenkins v Trustees of the Masonic Hall & Asylum Fund 2013 NY Slip Op 08214 Decided on December 10, 2013 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law ยง 431. This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Decided on December 10, 2013
Tom, J.P., Friedman, Acosta, Moskowitz, Gische, JJ.
11307N 309361/08

[*1]Claudia Jenkins, Plaintiff-Respondent,

v

Trustees of the Masonic Hall and Asylum Fund, et al., Defendants-Appellants.




Ryan, Brennan & Donnelly LLP, Floral Park (John O. Brennan
of counsel), for appellants.
Shapiro Law Offices, PLLC, Bronx (Ernest S. Buonocore of
counsel), for respondent.

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Laura G. Douglas, J.), entered May 24, 2013, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, in this action for personal injuries, denied defendants' motion to compel plaintiff to provide additional post-note of issue discovery, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendants' motion to compel plaintiff to provide additional post-note of issue discovery and to appear for an additional deposition (see generally 148 Magnolia, LLC v Merrimack Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 62 AD3d 486 [1st Dept 2009]). There is no basis for disturbing the court's determination that plaintiff had fully complied with its prior discovery order and defendants' subsequent discovery demands, and defendants fail to identify any specific information that had not yet been made available. Furthermore, the court did not abuse its discretion in determining that a third deposition of plaintiff was not warranted, since defendants had a sufficient opportunity to inquire into the relevant matters during plaintiff's prior depositions.

We have considered defendants' remaining arguments and find them unavailing.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER
OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.

ENTERED: DECEMBER 10, 2013

CLERK

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.