RG&D Establishes New Legal Precedents

Rogak and Gibbons recently obtained a favorable decision from the Appellate Division Second Department. David B. De Siver, a partner with the firm, successfully argued the appeal before the Appellate Court on behalf of the firm’s defendant-physician client. The legal issue in question involved whether serving an expert response in conjunction with a Summary Judgment Motion is timely if it is provided after a case has been certified as being ready for trial. Prior Court decisions were inconsistent with one another. The Appellate Division clarified its previous rulings, holding that a motion to dismiss can be entertained, even if expert witness disclosure was not previously exchanged. Mr. De Siver was recently quoted in the New York Law Journal praising the decision and discussing its significance in terms of prior precedents.  Rivers v. Birnbaum, 102 AD 3d 26.

In another case involving expert witness exchange, the Appellate Division upheld an Order from the lower Court, which prohibited a Plaintiff from making claims in their expert response, which were not contained in their Bill of Particulars.  The case is now frequently cited for this proposition. Arguinzoni v. Parkway Hospital 14 AD 3d 633.