throbber
FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 09/18/2020 04:11 PM
`
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 271
`
`INDEX NO. 512988/2016
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/18/2020
`
`
`
`
`DECISION AND
`ORDER WITH
`NOTICE OF ENTRY
`
`Index No.: 512988/2016
`Docket No.: 2018-11769
`
`
`SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
`APPELLATE DIVISION – SECOND JUDICIAL
`DEPARTMENT
`----------------------------------------------------------------------X
`LEONARDO GONZALEZ,
`
`
`
`
`
`
` Respondent,
`
`
`
`
`-against-
`
`
`RED HOOK CONTAINER TERMINAL, LLC.,
`
` Appellant.
`----------------------------------------------------------------------X
`
` O U N S E L O R S:
`
` C
`
`
`
`PLEASE TAKE NOTICE, that annexed is a true copy of a Decision and Order dated
`
`September 16, 2020 and duly entered in the office of the Clerk of the Appellate Division of the
`
`MORGAN LEVINE DOLAN, P.C.
`
`
`
`Duane R. Morgan
`Attorneys for Respondent
`18 East 41st Street, 6th Floor
`New York, NY 10017
`(212) 785-5115
`
`
`Supreme Court.
`
`Dated: New York, New York
`September 18, 2020
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`By:
`
`TO: BETANCOURT, VAN HEMMEN,
`
`GRECO & KENYON LLC
`
`Attorneys for Appellant
`151 Bodman Place, Suite 200
`Red Bank, New Jersey 07701
`(732) 530-4646
`
`
`
`1 of 4
`
`

`

`FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 09/18/2020 04:11 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 271
`
`INDEX NO. 512988/2016
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/18/2020
`
`Supreme Court of the State of New York
`Appellate Division: Second Judicial Department
`
`D63457
`Y/htr
`
` AD3d
`
`Submitted - May 19, 2020
`
`RUTH C. BALKIN, J.P.
`SYLVIA O. HINDS-RADIX
`COLLEEN D. DUFFY
`VALERIE BRATHWAITE NELSON, JJ.
`
`
`2018-11769
`
`DECISION & ORDER
`
`Leonardo Gonzalez, respondent, v Red Hook
`Container Terminal, LLC, appellant.
`
`(Index No. 512988/16)
`
`
`Betancourt, Van Hemmen, Greco & Kenyon LLC, New York, NY (Kristin K.
`Robbins and Jeanne-Marie D. Van Hemmen of counsel), for appellant.
`
`Morgan Levine Dolan, P.C., New York, NY (Duane R. Morgan of counsel), for
`respondent.
`
`In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant appeals from an
`order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Lawrence Knipel, J.), dated August 16, 2018. The order,
`insofar as appealed from, in effect, denied that branch of the defendant’s motion which was to
`exclude any third parties from observing the plaintiff’s medical examination by the defendant’s
`expert.
`
`ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
`
`In July 2016, the plaintiff commenced this action against the defendant, Red Hook
`Container Terminal, LLC, seeking to recover damages for injuries he alleges he sustained in July
`2015 when he fell approximately 10 to 15 feet from machinery at the Red Hook Terminal, which is
`owned and operated by the defendant. The plaintiff alleges, inter alia, that he sustained permanent
`brain injuries from the accident. The defendant sought a neuropsychological medical examination
`of the plaintiff to assess the plaintiff’s mental status and to evaluate the existence of any cognitive
`impairments. When the plaintiff appeared for the examination, he requested that an individual from
`IME Watchdog, Inc. (hereinafter the third-party observer), be permitted to observe the examination.
`The defendant’s doctor did not allow the third-party observer to be present and thus the plaintiff
`
`September 16, 2020
`GONZALEZ v RED HOOK CONTAINER TERMINAL, LLC
`
`Page 1.
`
`2 of 4
`
`

`

`FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 09/18/2020 04:11 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 271
`
`INDEX NO. 512988/2016
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/18/2020
`
`refused to proceed with the examination. The defendant then moved, inter alia, for an order
`compelling the plaintiff to undergo an examination without a third-party observer. In an order dated
`August 16, 2018, the Supreme Court, in effect, denied that branch of the defendant’s motion which
`was to exclude the presence of any third parties from observing the examination. In October 2018,
`the plaintiff underwent the examination and the third-party observer was present. The defendant now
`appeals the denial of that branch of its motion and seeks to conduct a second examination without
`the presence of the third-party observer.
`
`A plaintiff is entitled to have his or her attorney or other legal representative present
`during an examination as long as that individual does not interfere with the conduct of the
`examination (see Matter of Alexander L., 60 NY2d 329, 337; Ponce v Health Ins. Plan of Greater
`N.Y., 100 AD2d 963, 964). In 2017, in Henderson v Ross (147 AD3d 915, 916), this Court
`determined that a plaintiff’s nonlegal representative may also be present during the examination, as
`long as that representative does not interfere with the conduct of the examination. The First and
`Fourth Departments also have permitted a plaintiff to have a third-party observer or watchdog, as
`well as other nonlegal representatives, be present during that plaintiff’s examination unless a
`defendant establishes a justification for excluding that third-party observer or nonlegal representative
`(see Markel v Pure Power Boot Camp, Inc., 171 AD3d 28, 30; Martinez v Pinard, 160 AD3d 440,
`440; Santana v Johnson, 154 AD3d 452, 452; Marriott v Cappello, 151 AD3d 1580, 1583).
`
`Here, we agree with the Supreme Court’s determination, in effect, denying that branch
`of the defendant’s motion which was to preclude the third-party observer from attending the
`plaintiff’s examination since the defendant failed to meet its burden of establishing that the third-
`party observer would interfere with the conduct of the plaintiff’s examination (see Henderson v Ross,
`147 AD3d at 916; Guerra v McBean, 127 AD3d 462, 462).
`
`The parties’ remaining contentions are without merit.
`
`BALKIN, J.P., HINDS-RADIX, DUFFY and BRATHWAITE NELSON, JJ., concur.
`
`ENTER:
`
` Aprilanne Agostino
` Clerk of the Court
`
`September 16, 2020
`GONZALEZ v RED HOOK CONTAINER TERMINAL, LLC
`
`Page 2.
`
`3 of 4
`
`

`

`FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 09/18/2020 04:11 PM
`
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 271
`
`INDEX NO. 512988/2016
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/18/2020
`
`
`
`AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE
`
`
`STATE OF NEW YORK
`
`
`COUNTY OF NEW YORK
`
`
`)
`ss.:
`)
`
`
`
`DAIDRALYN ENGLISH, being duly sworn, deposes and says:
`
`I am not a party to this action, am over 18 years of age and reside at Bronx, New York.
`
`On the 18th day of September, 2020, I served a true copy of the annexed:
`
`DECISION AND ORDER WITH NOTICE OF ENTRY
`
`
`by e-filing via NYSEF and mailing the same in a sealed envelope, with postage prepaid thereon,
`
`in a post-office or official depository of the U.S. Postal Service, addressed to the address of the
`
`addressee(s) indicated below, which has been designated for service by the addressee(s) or, if no
`
`such address has been designated, is the last-known address of the addressee(s):
`
`BETANCOURT, VAN HEMMEN, GRECO & KENYON LLC
`151 Bodman Place, Suite 200
`Red Bank, New Jersey 07701
`
`
`
`
`
`
`____________________________________
` DAIDRALYN ENGLISH
`
`
`Sworn to before me this
`18th day of September, 2020
`
`
`___________________________
`
`Notary Public
`
`
`4 of 4
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket