Court Opinion

ID: 9916568
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-01-10 01:10:55.530136+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:25:39.873537
License: Public Domain

Contona v Godas
               2019 NY Slip Op 35075(U)
                    January 31, 2019
             Supreme Court, Nassau County
         Docket Number: Index No. 608451/16
                  Judge: Denise L. Sher
Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip
 Op 30001(U), are republished from various New York
 State and local government sources, including the New
  York State Unified Court System's eCourts Service.
 This opinion is uncorrected and not selected for official
                       publication.
  FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 02/11/2019                                                          INDEX NO. 608451/2016
  NYSCEF DOC. NO. 25                                                                                             0
                                                                                         RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/19/2019

                   SHORT FORM ORDER

                             SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

                   PRESENT: HON. DENISE L. SHER
                            Acting Supreme Court Justice

                                                                                TRIAL/IAS PART 32
            ANTOINE TTE CONTONA ,                                               NASSAU COUNTY

                                                 Plaintiff,                     Index No.: 608451/16
                                                                                Motion Seq. No.: 01
                                  - against -                                   Motion Date: 11/30/18

           MARIA G. GODAS and JOANNE GODAS,

                                                 Defendants.

                     The followin& papers have been read on this motion:
                                                                                        Papers Numbered
           Order to Show Cause, Affirmatio n and Exhibits                                      1
           Affirmation in Opposition                                                           2
           Reply Affirmatio n                                                                  3

                  Upon the foregoing papers, it is ordered that the motion is decided as follows:

                  Defendants move, pursuant to 22 NYCRR 202.2l(e), for an order striking plaintiffs Note

           of Issue and Certificate of Readiness and removing this action from the trial calendar; and move

           for an order staying this action pending the completion of outstanding discovery. Plaintiff

           opposes the motion.

                  The instant action was brought to recover for personal injuries allegedly sustained by

           plaintiff on March 20, 2016, when she tripped and fell on the sidewalk at defendants ' premises,

           1064-B North Broadway, Massapequa, County ofNassau, State of New York.

                                                         1 of 6
[* 1]
  FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 02/11/2019                                                             INDEX NO. 608451/2016
  NYSCEF DOC. NO. 25                                                                        RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/19/2019

                    Plaintiff commenced the action with the filing and service of a Summons and Verified

            Complaint on or about November 2, 2016. See Defendants' Affirmation in Support Exhibit A.

            Issue was joined on or about December 29, 2016. See Defendants' Affirmation in Support

            Exhibit B.

                   In support of the motion, counsel for defendants submits, in pertinent part, that, "[a]t the

            November 14, 2017, compliance conference, counsel for the Plaintiff advised the attorney for

            Defendants and the Court that Plaintiff was still undergoing treatment as a result of the injuries

            she allegedly sustained in the accident that occurred on March 20, 2016. At that conference,

            Defendants reserved the right to conduct an Independent Medical Examination (hereinafter

            'IME') within forty-five (45) days of Plaintiff completing treatment.. .. On February 27, 2018, the

            parties appeared for another compliance conference before Justice Sher. At the conference,

            (sic) parties advised the Court that Plaintiff was still treating and that the IME has (sic) not been

            conducted. Justice Sher directed Defendants to proceed with the IME notwithstanding the fact

            that the Plaintiff was still undergoing treatment. On March 14, 2018, the IME of Plaintiff was

            conducted. On March 20, 2018, a certification conference was held, and a certification Order was

            issued directing Plaintiff to file her Note oflssue on or before August 20, 2018 .... On June 18,

            2018, Plaintiff filed a Note oflssue in this action .... On or about September 23, 2018 (nearly

            three (3) months after filing of the Note oflssue), counsel for Plaintiff contacted the undersigned

            to advise that Plaintiff was set to undergo a second surgery on her foot which was scheduled to

            take place on October 25, 2018. Moreover, on or about November 3, 2018, counsel for Plaintiff

            contacted the undersigned to advise that Plaintiff did not undergo a surgery on October 25, 2018,

            and it was re-scheduled to December. We expect that additional medical records will be required

                                                             -2-

                                                           2 of 6
[* 2]
  FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 02/11/2019                                                              INDEX NO. 608451/2016
  NYSCEF DOC. NO. 25                                                                         RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/19/2019

            to be processed, as well as a supplemental deposition and IME of the Plaintiff in order to

            determine what additional treatment she has received. It is expected that the parties will not be

            able to proceed with the supplemental deposition and IME of the Plaintiff until such time as she

            firmly concludes treatment.. .. As Plaintiff still continues to undergo treatment in connection with

            the injuries allegedly sustained as a result ofher alleged March 20, 2016 accident, there is

            outstanding discovery which prevents this action from proceeding to trial as Defendants are

            entitled to an opportunity to prepare an appropriate defense of this matter, require an opportunity

            to conduct a supplemental deposition, and require a supplemental IME of the Plaintiff." See

            Defendants' Affirmation in Support Exhibits A-F.

                    Counsel for defendants adds that, "[i]n the case at hand, Plaintiff filed a Note oflssue on

            or about June 18, 2018 attesting that the case was ready for trial.. .. However, at the time of the

            filing of the Note of Issue Plaintiff was still continuing treatment and as a result, Plaintiff was

            scheduled to undergo an additional surgery on October 25, 2018. Knowing that Plaintiff was still

           treating and that additional discovery would be required, Plaintiff still proceeded to file the Note

           oflssue and in (sic) the Certificate of Readiness indicating that the case is ready for trial. Since

           additional items of discovery remain outstanding, the Note oflssue should be vacated in order for

           Defendants to complete discovery, as proceeding to trial will cause prejudice to the Defendants

           in preparing an adequate defense in this matter." See Defendants' Affirmation in Support Exhibit

           F.

                   In opposition to the motion, counsel for plaintiff submits, in pertinent part, that,

           "[d]efendants' 'Affirmation in Support' accurately sets forth that plaintiff is still undergoing

           treatment to the left foot, for injuries claimed to be related to incident which is the subject of this

                                                             -3-

                                                           3 of 6
[* 3]
  FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 02/11/2019                                                            INDEX NO. 608451/2016
  NYSCEF DOC. NO. 25                                                                        RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/19/2019

            litigation. Defendants further accurately set forth that I contacted counsel for defendants on or

            about September of2018 with respect to discussing plaintiffs plans for surgery, at that time

            anticipated to be performed on October 25, 2018. That anticipated date for surgery was canceled

            due to, upon information and belief, discovery of deep vein thrombosis within plaintiffs leg.

            Thereafter, I contacted counsel for defendants to inform them that the surgery was being

            rescheduled and was anticipated for some time in December. Upon information and belief, no

            dates were available for the procedure in December and the procedure has been tentatively

            scheduled for February 5, 2019. That February date has not yet been confirmed to plaintiff by all

            of the medical providers necessary to move forward with the procedure. As a preliminary matter,

            in the event the plaintiff undergoes the anticipated surgery, plaintiff does not have any objection

            to consenting to a further deposition, limited to new treatment and matters not previously covered

            at her previous examination. Furthermore, and in the event plaintiff undergoes the anticipated

            surgery, plaintiff has no objection to consenting to a further defense medical examination. Should

            plaintiff undergo the anticipated surgery, plaintiff would respectfully leave it to the Court to

            decide whether the additional discovery could not be performed expeditiously without the need

           for vacating plaintiffs Note oflssue. However, the defendant's motion is respectfully premature.

           Plaintiff has not in fact undergone the aforementioned surgical procedure as of the date of this

           Order to Show Cause, and thus there is no compelling reason at this time to vacate plaintiffs

           Note oflssue and Certificate of Readiness. The defendants' entitlement to additional items of

           outstanding discovery, as outlined within the defendants' 'Affirmation in Support', are

           anticipated and hypothetical at the present time, warranting denial of their motion."

                                                             -4-

                                                           4 of 6
[* 4]
  FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 02/11/2019                                                                       INDEX NO. 608451/2016
  NYSCEF DOC. NO. 25                                                                                 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/19/2019

                      A Note ofl ssu e may be vacated pur
                                                              suant to Ne w York Court Ru les § 202
                                                                                                            .21(e) if the
             following circumstances are presen
                                                      t:

                              Within 20 days after service of a not
                                                                          e of issue and certificate
                              of readiness, any party to the action
                                                                         or special proceeding may
                              move to vacate the note of issue, upo
                                                                          n affidavit showing in what
                              respects the case is not ready for tria
                                                                         l, and the court may vacate
                             the note of issue if it appears that a
                                                                        material fact in the certificate
                             of readiness is incorrect, or that the
                                                                        certificate of readiness fails
                             to comply with the requirements of
                                                                        this section in any material
                             respect. ... After such period, ... no suc
                                                                        h motion shall be allowed
                            except for good cause shown. At any
                                                                          time, the court on its own
                            motion may vacate a note of issue
                                                                      if it appears that a material fact
                            in the certificate of readiness is inc
                                                                      orrect, or that the certificate of
                            readiness fails to comply with the req
                                                                          uirements of this section in
                            some material respect.
                    That is, a timely motion to vacate the
                                                               Note ofl ssu e pursuant to 22 NY CR
                                                                                                           R § 202.21(e)
           need only demonstrate in what resp
                                                    ects the case is not ready for trial. See
                                                                                                Mosley v. Flavius, 13
           A.D.3d 346, 785 N.Y.S.2d 742 (2d
                                                    Dept. 2004); Audiovox Corp. v. Ben
                                                                                       yam        ini 265 A.D.2d 135,
           707 N.Y.S.2d 137 (2d Dept. 2000).
                                                    However, if the party seeking discove
                                                                                                ry moves to compel
           such discovery after the twenty (20
                                                   ) day period provided by 22 NY CR
                                                                                          R 202.21(e) has expired,
          the more stringent standard under 22
                                                     NY CR R 202.21 (d) requiring the mo
                                                                                              vant to demonstrate
          unusual or unanticipated circumstan
                                                    ces and substantial prejudice must
                                                                                           be met.
                  In the instant matter, defendants' mo
                                                            tion to vacate the Note ofl ssu e was
                                                                                                      not made within
          twenty (20) days after service of the
                                                    Note ofl ssu e and Certificate of Rea
                                                                                            diness. However, the
         Court finds that defendants have dem
                                                    onstrated unanticipated circumstan
                                                                                           ces and substantial
         prejudice in support of their reques
                                                t to vacate the Note of Issue. The Cou
                                                                                            rt notes that the instant
         matter is currently calendared before
                                                    the Central Jury Part on February 19,
                                                                                              2019. Defendants
         would be prejudiced if ordered to pro
                                                    ceed to jury selection on said date wit
                                                                                              hout having the
         discovery detailed above if pla inti ff
                                                   does indeed have the additional surg
                                                                                           ery.

                                                              -5-

                                                               5 of 6
[* 5]
  FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 02/11/2019                                                               INDEX NO. 608451/2016
  NYSCEF DOC. NO. 25                                                                          RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/19/2019
        "'

                                                                                    NYC RR 202.2        1(e), for an
                    Accordi11:gly, the branch of defendants' motion, pursuant to 22

                                                                                  ness and striking this action from
             order vacating plaint iff's Note of Issue and Certificate of Readi

             the trial calendar, is hereby GRANTED. And it is further
                                                                                          t matter by April 1, 2019.
                     ORDERED that plaint iff shall file a Note oflssu e in the instan

                                                                                  April 1, 2019, there still remains
             A Copy of this Order must accompany the Note oflssu e. If, by
                                                                                     iff, counsel for the parties are
             outstanding discovery pertaining to an additional surgery for plaint

             advised to contact Chambers with respect to same.
                                                                                            pending the completion
                     The branch of defendants' motion for an order staying this action

             of outstanding discovery, is hereby DENIED.

                     This constitutes the Decision and Order of this Court.

              Dated: Mineola, New York
                     January 31, 2019                                 ENTERED
                                                                            FEB l \ 20\S
                                                                         NASSAU c()UN'fY
                                                                      COUNTY CLERK'S OfFICE

                                                                -6-
                                                           6 of 6
[* 6]