« New York Civil Law's Twitter Feed | Main | New York Court of Appeals Hears Oral Argument on Certified Questions Concerning Products Liability »

January 26, 2009


David H. Rosen

Your headline is in error, to the extent that it implies that the 3rd Dept decision applied the Court of Appeals' opinion in the Arons case. Defendant's attorney in Straub conducted an informal interview with plaintiff's treating physician, before the Court of Appeals' decision. The AD viewed this as violating the law in effect at the time, citing the AD opinion in Arons.
This should not be viewed as holding that an informal interview conducted now, but without the benefit of an authorization, should automatically lead to a new trial.


Thank you for the clarification David. I clarified the headline to avoid any confusion.

The comments to this entry are closed.