Opinion
No. 5142N.
May 19, 2011.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (James A. Yates, J.), entered January 25, 2011, which, insofar as appealed from as limited by the briefs, denied defendants' motion to compel the disclosure of correspondence postdating the complaint, unanimously modified, on the law and the facts, and in the exercise of discretion, to grant the motion as to postcomplaint correspondence related to plaintiffs customers Blue Nile, Tiffany Co., and Birks Mayors, and otherwise affirmed, with out costs.
Mound Cotton Wollan Greengrass, New York (Robert S. Goodman of counsel), for appellant-respondent.
Jones Day, New York (James A. A. Kirk of counsel), for respondents-appellants.
Before: Concur — Andrias, J.P., Friedman, Freedman, Richter and Román, JJ.
Correspondence related to Blue Nile, Tiffany Co., and Birks Mayors concerns and is essential to the defense of plaintiffs claims of lost profits and lost business opportunities with respect to these companies ( see Allen v Crowell-Collier Publ. Co., 21 NY2d 403, 406; Osowski v AMEC Constr. Mgt., Inc., 69 AD3d 99, 107; Flower Cart v Fackovec, 163 AD2d 184, 187).