Hyperlawhypertext legal database Rottmann v. Stegemann 42 Misc. 2d 562

← Cases

Rottmann v. Stegemann

42 Misc. 2d 562 Court Supreme Court, Trial Term, Nassau County, Decision date 1964-04-01 English

Delivered by Bernard S. Meyer, J.

Contents

Majority

p. 562
Irene E. Rottmann, Plaintiff, v. Herman Stegemann et al., Defendants.
Supreme Court, Trial Term, Nassau County,
April 1, 1964.
James T. McQuade for plaintiff. Marvin, Montfort, Healy, McGuire & Salley for Herman Stegemann, defendant.

This motion to strike the action from the calendar is granted and the action is stricken from the calendar. Plaintiff errs in his construction of the Special Rule Requiring Physical Examination and Exchange of Medical Information (Rules of Appellate Division, 2d Dept., part 4). Rule VI of part 4 provides that “No cause otherwise eligible to be noticed for trial may be noticed unless there has been compliance with this part, or an order dispensing with compliance ’ ’. While it is true that defendant may demand a physical examination under rule I of that fart, he is not obligated to. Plaintiff also may initiate physical examination procedure and until one of the parties has may not notice the case for trial.