Fowler v Buffa

Annotate this Case
Fowler v Buffa 2019 NY Slip Op 01306 Decided on February 21, 2019 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 February 21, 2019
Renwick, J.P., Tom, Singh, Moulton, JJ.
8454 22577/13E

[*1]Norma Fowler, Plaintiff-Appellant,

v

Salvatore D. Buffa, M.D., et al., Defendants-Respondents, Surgicare Ambulatory Center, Inc., Defendant.



Law Office of Robert F. Danzi, Jericho (Christine Coscia of counsel), for appellant.

Martin Clearwater & Bell LLP, New York (Barbara D. Goldberg of counsel), for Salvatore D. Buffa, M.D., Victoria A. Brand, CRNA and Alliance Anesthesiology Associates, P.L.L.C., respondents.

Ekblom & Partners, LLP, New York (Deborah I. Meyer of counsel), for Anurag Shrivastava, M.D., respondent.



Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Faviola A. Soto, J.), entered July 31, 2017, which, following a jury verdict in defendants' favor, dismissed the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The trial court did not err in precluding a disability insurance form alleged to contain a statement against interest from defendant Anurag Shrivastava, M.D. The imposition of sanctions for discovery misfeasance is a matter better left to the sound discretion of the trial court (see Gomez v New York City Hous. Auth., 217 AD2d 110, 114 [1st Dept 1995]). CPLR 3101 provides that there shall be full disclosure of all matter material and necessary in the prosecution or defense of an action, including a party's own statements (see also Sands v News Am. Publ., 161 AD2d 30, 42 [1st Dept 1990]). Plaintiff's disclosure of the document less than two days prior to trial was an unfair surprise for which no reasonable excuse was proffered (see Curbean v Kibel, 12 AD3d 206, 207 [1st Dept 2004]; Ward v Mehar, 264 AD2d 515, 516 [2d Dept 1999]).

We have considered plaintiff's remaining contentions and find them unavailing.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER

OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.

ENTERED: FEBRUARY 21, 2019

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.