From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Argumedo v. 303 Tenants Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 26, 1998
246 A.D.2d 616 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

Opinion

January 26, 1998

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Rappaport, J.).


Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with one bill of costs.

While CPLR 3101 (a) provides for full disclosure of all matter material and necessary in the prosecution or defense of an action, unlimited disclosure is not required, and supervision of disclosure is generally left to the sound discretion of the trial court ( see, City of Mount Vernon v. Lexington Ins. Co., 232 A.D.2d 358). In light of the fact that the appellants have not made a showing that the records at issue even exist, the Supreme Court properly granted the plaintiffs' motion for a protective order ( see, Fascaldi v. Fascaldi, 209 A.D.2d 578).

Miller, J.P., Ritter, Sullivan, Santucci and McGinity, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Argumedo v. 303 Tenants Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 26, 1998
246 A.D.2d 616 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
Case details for

Argumedo v. 303 Tenants Corp.

Case Details

Full title:KEVEN ARGUMEDO et al., Respondents, v. 303 TENANTS CORP. et al.…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Jan 26, 1998

Citations

246 A.D.2d 616 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
667 N.Y.S.2d 305

Citing Cases

Hochheiser v. Alin

CPLR 3120(2) requires that notices for discovery "shall set forth the items to be [produced] by individual…

Doe v. Archdiocese of N.Y.

Clearly it would be inefficient to compel institutional defendants to endure multiple depositions oftentimes…