Opinion
12769N Index No. 152912/16 595978/17 Case No. 2020-02428
01-05-2021
Vincent DEL GROSSO, Plaintiff–Appellant, v. JIMMY JAZZ STATEN ISLAND, LLC, Defendant, General Growth Properties Inc., et al., Defendants–Appellants GGP Staten Island initially sued herein as General Growth Properties, Inc. et al, Third–Party Plaintiffs–Respondents, v. All–Rite Construction Company, Inc. et al., Third–Party Defendants–Respondents.
The Altman Law Firm, PLLC, Woodmere (Michael T. Altman of counsel), for appellant. Lawrence, Worden, Rainis & Bard, P.C., Melville (Michael E. Shay of counsel), for General Growth Properties, Inc. and General Growth Services, Inc., respondents. O'Connor Redd Orlando LLP, Port Chester (Lauren Creegan of counsel), for K & R Electric Company, Inc., respondent.
The Altman Law Firm, PLLC, Woodmere (Michael T. Altman of counsel), for appellant.
Lawrence, Worden, Rainis & Bard, P.C., Melville (Michael E. Shay of counsel), for General Growth Properties, Inc. and General Growth Services, Inc., respondents.
O'Connor Redd Orlando LLP, Port Chester (Lauren Creegan of counsel), for K & R Electric Company, Inc., respondent.
Renwick, J.P., Gische, Kern, Oing, Mendez, JJ.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Arlene P. Bluth, J.), entered November 19, 2019, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, granted the motion of third-party defendant K & R Electric Company, Inc. (K & R) to compel plaintiff to provide authorizations for his substance abuse and mental health treatment records and denied plaintiff's cross-motion for a protective order precluding disclosure of those records, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Plaintiff alleges that as a result of an accident in which an object fell on his head from above, he sustained, as relevant here, a traumatic brain injury with resulting cognitive impairments and experienced post-traumatic stress disorder, depression, mood swings, loss of sense of self, and anxiety, among other things. The motion court providently exercised its discretion when it directed disclosure of plaintiff's substance abuse and mental health treatment records. Plaintiff put his mental condition in issue such that the interests of justice significantly outweighed the need to maintain confidentiality of those records by alleging that he sustained cognitive and psychological injuries impairments (see Castro v. Admar Supply Co., Inc., 159 A.D.3d 1616, 1619, 70 N.Y.S.3d 442 [4th Dept. 2018] ; Rothstein v. Huh, 60 A.D.3d 839, 839, 875 N.Y.S.2d 250 [2d Dept. 2009] ; Rosen v. MHM Realty LLC, 166 A.D.3d 428, 88 N.Y.S.3d 1 [1st Dept. 2018] ; see generally Mental Hygiene Law § 33.13[c][1] ; cf. Del Terzo v. Hospital for Special Surgery, 95 A.D.3d 551, 944 N.Y.S.2d 79 [1st Dept. 2012] ; Gough v. Panorama Windows Ltd., 133 A.D.3d 526, 19 N.Y.S.3d 169 [1st Dept. 2015] ).