« 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.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)