Zakhidov v. Boulevard Tenants Corp.

Summary

The appellate court reversed a judgment awarding the plaintiff $50,000 in damages for past pain and suffering and nothing for future pain and suffering. It held that precluding the plaintiff’s hospital records for failure to provide updated HIPAA-compliant authorizations was an improvident exercise of discretion because the record did not show willful and contumacious noncompliance or prejudice to the defendants. The matter was remitted for a new trial on damages.

Holdings

1. The preclusion of plaintiff's hospital records and the prohibition on expert reference to those records were an improvident exercise of discretion because the record did not show that plaintiff's failure to provide updated HIPAA-compliant authorizations was willful and contumacious.
2. The judgment was reversed and the matter remitted to the Supreme Court, Queens County, for a new trial on the issue of damages.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the trial court abused its discretion under CPLR 3126 by precluding plaintiff's hospital records and preventing his expert from referring to them based on the failure to provide updated HIPAA-compliant authorizations.
2. Whether the judgment should be reversed and the matter remitted for a new trial on damages.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded