New York State Court of Claims

New York State Court of Claims

CARDEW v. THE STATE OF NEW YORK, #2004-019-603, Claim No. 109968, Motion No. M-69371


Synopsis


Claimant's motion for a protective order is denied as moot.

Case Information

UID:
2004-019-603
Claimant(s):
ROBERT CARDEW
Claimant short name:
CARDEW
Footnote (claimant name) :

Defendant(s):
THE STATE OF NEW YORK
Footnote (defendant name) :

Third-party claimant(s):

Third-party defendant(s):

Claim number(s):
109968
Motion number(s):
M-69371
Cross-motion number(s):

Judge:
FERRIS D. LEBOUS
Claimant's attorney:
ROBERT CARDEW, PRO SE
Defendant's attorney:
HON. ELIOT SPITZER, ATTORNEY GENERALBY: Carol A. Cocchiola, Assistant Attorney General, of counsel
Third-party defendant's attorney:

Signature date:
December 22, 2004
City:
Binghamton
Comments:

Official citation:

Appellate results:

See also (multicaptioned case)



Decision

Claimant, an inmate appearing pro se, moves for a protective order to prevent disclosure of his complete medical file during the course of discovery in this claim. (CPLR 3103 & 3122). The State of New York (hereinafter "State") has filed papers in response indicating that it does not object to providing a more case-specific medical authorization form.

In connection with the discovery process on this and two other claims filed by claimant, the State mailed to claimant a medical authorization form on November 4, 2004 that was not specifically tailored to any one of those claims. The State concedes that claimant's entire medical record is not material and necessary to this claim. The State indicates that it will now re-draft the medical authorization form so as to include records for this claim only, namely medical records relating to claimant's hearing loss. That having been said, however, the State requests in turn that claimant be directed to produce more specific dates or, in the alternative, that the State reserve its right to request additional records beyond the one-year period pre-dating June 28, 2004. Additionally, the State objects to claimant's request to be present while his records are selected for disclosure.


Based on the State's willingness to re-draft the medical authorization in a more case- specific manner and provide claimant with an itemized list of all medical documents turned over to defendant by the Department of Correctional Services, the court finds that claimant's motion for a protective order should be denied as moot. However, claimant is directed to produce more specific dates, failing which the court reserves the State's right to request additional records beyond the one-year period pre-dating June 28, 2004. Further, the court denies claimant's request to be present while his records are reviewed and selected for disclosure. Finally, in the future, the parties are encouraged to resolve future discovery disputes such as this, if any, without the need for further court intervention.


Accordingly, in view of the foregoing, it is ORDERED that Motion No. M-69371 is DENIED AS MOOT.


December 22, 2004
Binghamton, New York

HON. FERRIS D. LEBOUS
Judge of the Court of Claims


The court has considered the following papers in connection with this motion:
  1. Claim, filed October 18, 2004.
  2. "Motion for Protective Order and Objection to Disclosure", Motion No. M-69371, dated November 9, 2004, and filed November 17, 2004.
  3. Affidavit of Robert Cardew, in support of motion, sworn to November 9, 2004, with attached exhibits.
  4. Affirmation of Carol A. Cocchiola, AAG, in response to motion, dated December 10, 2004, and filed December 13, 2004.