Valuecare Pharm. Inc v. MVAIC

Valuecare Pharm. Inc v MVAIC (2021 NY Slip Op 50429(U)) [*1] Valuecare Pharm. Inc v MVAIC 2021 NY Slip Op 50429(U) [71 Misc 3d 136(A)] Decided on May 14, 2021 Appellate Term, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports. Decided on May 14, 2021 SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, FIRST DEPARTMENT PRESENT: Higgitt, J.P., Brigantti, Hagler, JJ. 570140/20 Valuecare Pharmacy Inc, a/a/o Sharon Hall, Plaintiff-Respondent, against MVAIC, Defendant-Appellant. Defendant, as limited by its briefs, appeals from so much of an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Bronx County (Myrna Socorro, J.), entered on or about July 3, 2019, which granted, in part, plaintiff's motion to compel discovery. Per Curiam. Order (Myrna Socorro, J.), entered on or about July 3, 2019, affirmed, with $10 costs. Where a party fails to timely object to discovery demands within the 20-day period prescribed by CPLR article 31 (see CPLR 3122[a]; 3133[a]), appellate review is limited to determining whether the requested material is privileged under CPLR 3101 or the demand is palpably improper (see Khatskevich v Victor, 184 AD3d 504 [2020]; Jefferson v State of New York, 60 AD3d 1215 [2009]). Here, defendant did not timely object to plaintiff's discovery demands, including the interrogatories and notice for discovery and inspection, and, in fact, ignored them until plaintiff moved to compel compliance several months later. Since defendant did not argue below that the discovery requested was privileged or that the requests were palpably improper, we have no cause to disturb Civil Court's grant of plaintiff's motion to compel (see Precision Chiropractic, PC v MVAIC, 67 Misc 3d 126[A], 2020 NY Slip Op 50359[U] [App Term, 1st Dept 2020]). THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT. I concur I concur I concur Decision Date: May 14, 2021