response to bill of particulars new york

Cantiague Figure Skating Club, 294 A.D.2d 525 (a breach of contract case seeking unredacted income tax returns) and Sullivan v.

Providing a Social Security Number to defendants is reasonably calculated to lead to admissible evidence as to the issues of this action… Plaintiff’s counsel argues that plaintiff’s Social Security Number is irrelevant because he is not seeking lost earnings…However, the Social Security Number is useful, for example, in searching for plaintiff’s medical records and determining the amount of plaintiff’s Medicaid lien.” Based on the case law, a plaintiff must clearly respond to the question at a deposition. 30105 the court held that “Plaintiff was improperly directed not to answer whether he has a Social Security Number (Pedraza EBT, at 7:14-17.) Moreover, in defending the action, Defendants are entitled to conduct an investigation into any of prior claims or injuries, medical treatment, and criminal history, which implicates the use of his Social Security Number.” Similarly, in Pedraza v. A plaintiff’s Social Security Number is useful, for example in searching for his or her medical records and determining the amount of his or her Medicaid lien.

Sebzda, supra., the court compelled disclosure stating that “Providing a Social Security Number ‘is reasonably calculated to lead to admissible evidence’ and therefore satisfies the relevance standard in CPLR 3101(a), even where plaintiff was not seeking lost earnings.

However, when the requisite showing is made (which should be simple in a personal injury case), the number must be disclosed. Defendants have been denied Social Security Numbers when “Defendants’ demand for plaintiffs’ Social Security Numbers was accompanied neither by a demand for authorizations to obtain any documents identifiable only by reference to such numbers, nor by any other showing of relevance or necessity.” Sullivan v. That being said, it is clear that a claim of privacy cannot bar the discovery of Social Security Numbers in personal injury cases where defendants are able to show that they are necessary or indispensable for defendant to obtain relevant records such as medical records, perform prior claim searches, determine liens, etc. Since evidence itself is not the proper subject of a Bill of Particulars, a mere device for its acquisition is a fortiori inappropriately requested. The primary usefulness of the decedent’s Social Security Number is as a tool for acquiring evidence.

2d 519 (Ct Cl 1978) the Court stated that the decedent’s Social Security Number was “not material to any element of the causes of action alleged, and would not serve to amplify any aspect of the pleadings. The Courts have held that a demand for a Social Security Number in a Bill of Particulars is improper as it does not serve to amplify the pleadings and, instead, it is evidentiary in nature and, thus, more properly made in a discovery demand. However, the request should properly be in the form of a discovery demand, preferably attached to a demand for authorizations, and not in a Bill of Particulars. Claims of privacy and concerns for identity theft will not bar discovery of a Social Security Number. A Social Security Number is discoverable in a personal injury case because it is reasonably calculated to lead to admissible evidence.

Response to bill of particulars new york