Case Name: Joanne Moreland, Individually and Derivatively as a Member of PCL, LLC, Appellant, v. David Huck et al., Respondents
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 2017-12-22
Citations: 156 A.D.3d 1396
Docket Number: 
Parties: Joanne Moreland, Individually and Derivatively as a Member of PCL, LLC, Appellant, v David Huck et al., Respondents.
Judges: Present—Centra, J.P., Peradotto, Carni, DeJoseph and Winslow, JJ.
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 156
Pages: 1396–1396

Head Matter:
Joanne Moreland, Individually and Derivatively as a Member of PCL, LLC, Appellant, v David Huck et al., Respondents.
[65 NYS3d 861]

Opinion:
Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Erie County (Christopher J. Burns, J.), entered September 14, 2016. The order, inter alia, granted the motion of defendants for summary judgment dismissing the amended complaint, and denied the cross motion of plaintiff to strike the affidavits of three witnesses, which were submitted by defendants in support of their motion.
It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.
Memorandum: Plaintiff appeals from an order that, inter alia, granted defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the amended complaint and denied plaintiff's cross motion to strike the affidavits of three witnesses, which were submitted by defendants in support of their motion for summary judgment.
We affirm the order for reasons stated in the decision at Supreme Court. We write only to address plaintiff's contention that the court should have granted her cross motion to strike the affidavits of the three subject witnesses because defendants failed to provide timely expert witness disclosure for those witnesses pursuant to CPLR 3101 (d) (1) (i). We reject that contention. Even assuming, arguendo, that each of the three witnesses provided expert testimony in his affidavit, we note that CPLR 3212 (b) provides in relevant part that, "[w]here an expert affidavit is submitted in support of, or opposition to, a motion for summary judgment, the court shall not decline to consider the affidavit because an expert exchange pursuant to [CPLR 3101 (d) (1) (i)] was not furnished prior to the submission of the affidavit."
Present—Centra, J.P., Peradotto, Carni, DeJoseph and Winslow, JJ.