Summary
In Gordon v. City of New York, 245 AD2d 184, 666 N.Y.S.2d 186 (1st Dep't 1997), this Court held that post-accident repair estimates were discoverable because of their pertinence to determining who controlled or maintained the sidewalk where Plaintiff's injury occurred.
Summary of this case from Dixon v. Afternoon Delight Fifth Ave. Assocs., LLCOpinion
December 16, 1997
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Norman Ryp, J.).
The requested repair estimates, even if ultimately held inadmissible at trial because made after the accident, are discoverable since they may shed light on the issue of who controlled or maintained the area of the sidewalk where the accident occurred ( see, Olivia v. Gouze, 285 App. Div. 762, 765, affd 1 N.Y.2d 811; cf., Cleland v. 60-02 Woodside Corp., 221 A.D.2d 307). We have considered plaintiff's argument that defendant's failure to produce the repair estimates was willful and contumacious, and find that defendant's conduct does not warrant sanctions at this time. Plaintiff's argument concerning the sufficiency of defendant's affidavit attesting to the nonexistence of certain documents that were directed to be produced in the order on appeal should be addressed in the first instance to the motion court.
Concur — Ellerin, J. P., Wallach, Mazzarelli, Andrias and Colabella, JJ.