Opinion
February 27, 1996
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Salvador Collazo, J.).
It is well-settled law that the purpose of a bill of particulars is to amplify the pleadings, limit the proof, and to prevent surprise at trial ( Laukaitis v. Ski Stop, 202 A.D.2d 554, 555; State of New York v. Horsemen's Benevolent Protective Assn., 34 A.D.2d 769, 770).
In the matter at bar, the specific material requested by the defendant is discoverable and the proper subject of a bill of particulars as that material is a critical part of plaintiffs' special duty cause of action. In addition, a complaint in a special action based upon General Municipal Law § 205-a must specify or identify the statute, ordinances, rules, orders or requirements with which the defendant allegedly failed to comply, the manner in which the injuries complained of occurred, and the facts from which it appears that said neglect or failure directly or indirectly caused the injuries ( Kenavan v. City of New York, 70 N.Y.2d 558, 567; Zanghi v. Niagara Frontier Transp. Commn., 85 N.Y.2d 423, 441). As a result, the defendant was within its rights to seek this information through a bill of particulars ( see, Whirl Knits v. Adler Bus. Machs., 54 A.D.2d 760).
Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Wallach, Rubin and Tom, JJ.