From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Riverside Cap. Advisors v. First Secured

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 18, 2002
292 A.D.2d 515 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)

Opinion

2001-10766

Submitted February 19, 2002.

March 18, 2002.

In an action, inter alia, to recover on promissory notes, the defendant First Secured Capital Corporation appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (O'Connell, J.), dated November 2, 2001, which denied its motion pursuant to CPLR 3104(d) to vacate stated portions of an order of a court-appointed referee dated August 7, 2001, which directed it to respond to certain interrogatories and to provide certain document discovery.

Jeffrey B. Hulse, Hauppauge, N.Y., for appellant and defendant Thomas B. Donovan Family Trust.

Shaw, Licitra, Bohner, Esernio, Schwartz Pfluger, P.C., Garden City, N.Y. (Steven H. Blatt of counsel), for respondents.

Before: DAVID S. RITTER, J.P., CORNELIUS J. O'BRIEN, STEPHEN G. CRANE, BARRY A. COZIER, JJ.


ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs, and the defendant First Secured Capital Corporation shall respond to the interrogatories and document demands within 30 days after service upon it of a copy of this decision and order.

The requirement of CPLR 3101(a) that there be "full disclosure of all matter material and necessary in the prosecution or defense of an action" is interpreted liberally in favor of disclosure (CPLR 3101[a]; see, Liverano v. Devinsky, 278 A.D.2d 386, 387). The Supreme Court providently exercised its wide discretion in denying the appellant's motion to vacate the order of the referee requiring it to respond to certain interrogatories and document demands (see, Allen v. Crowell-Collier Pub. Co., 21 N.Y.2d 403, 406; Matter of Town of Pleasant Val. v. New York State Bd. of Real Prop. Servs., 253 A.D.2d 8, 16). The evidence sought by the plaintiffs was material and necessary to the prosecution of its claim to contractual security interests in the appellant's property and instruments.

The appellant's remaining contentions are without merit.

RITTER, J.P., O'BRIEN, CRANE and COZIER, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Riverside Cap. Advisors v. First Secured

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 18, 2002
292 A.D.2d 515 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
Case details for

Riverside Cap. Advisors v. First Secured

Case Details

Full title:RIVERSIDE CAPITAL ADVISORS, INC., ETC., ET AL., respondents, v. FIRST…

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

Date published: Mar 18, 2002

Citations

292 A.D.2d 515 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
739 N.Y.S.2d 281

Citing Cases

Wunderlich v. Liberty Meadows, LLC

CPLR 3101(a) broadly mandates "full disclosure of all matter material and necessary in the prosecution or…

Ural v. Encompass Ins. Co. of Am.

With respect to the parties' discovery issues, CPLR 3101(a) broadly mandates “full disclosure of all matter…