From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Venture v. Preferred Mut. Ins. Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Dec 6, 2016
2016 N.Y. Slip Op. 95895 (N.Y. App. Div. 2016)

Opinion

Motion No: M-4998

12-06-2016

Daniel Venture, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Preferred Mutual Insurance Company, Defendant-Respondent.


An appeal having been taken to this Court from the order of the Supreme Court, New York County, entered on or about January 21, 2016,And plaintiffs-appellants having moved for a stay of discovery pending hearing and determination of the aforesaid appeal, and for the production of in camera documents that are subject to this appeal,Now, upon reading and filing the papers with respect to the motion, and due deliberation having been had thereon, It is ordered that the motion is granted to the extent of staying all discovery on condition plaintiffs-appellants perfect the appeal for the April 2017 Term. The motion, to the extent it seeks the production of certain in camera documents for review, is denied, without prejudice to plaintiffs-appellants seeking further relief with respect to the submission of documents by defendant-respondent, under seal, as a supplemental record on appeal.

ENTERED: December 6, 2016

_____________________ CLERK

Present - Hon. Angela M. Mazzarelli,Justice Presiding, Dianne T. Renwick Rosalyn H. Richter Sallie Manzanet-Daniels Paul G. Feinman,Justices

M-4998

Index No. 155587/14


Summaries of

Venture v. Preferred Mut. Ins. Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Dec 6, 2016
2016 N.Y. Slip Op. 95895 (N.Y. App. Div. 2016)
Case details for

Venture v. Preferred Mut. Ins. Co.

Case Details

Full title:Daniel Venture, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Preferred Mutual…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Date published: Dec 6, 2016

Citations

2016 N.Y. Slip Op. 95895 (N.Y. App. Div. 2016)

Citing Cases

Venture v. Preferred Mut. Ins. Co.

By order of this Court, discovery was stayed. This Court denied plaintiffs' application for production of the…