Defendants appeal. We agree that the documents identifying defendants' customers are relevant to show unfair competition and are discoverable (see, Romano v Belt Painting Corp., 77 A.D.2d 565; Alderman v Eagle, 41 A.D.2d 641). However, Special Term exceeded its authority in ordering defendant to create a customer list from these documents.
(b) After the final distribution to creditors and after deducting the Permanent Receiver's charges and expenses, the Permanent Receiver shall distribute any surplus in the manner prescribed in section 1002-a of this chapter or, if dissolution of the corporation is not involved, in such manner as the court shall order."[Emphasis Added] The appointment of a Receiver is a drastic remedy (see Romano v. Belt Painting Corp., 77 AD2d 565 [2d Dept 1980]). "The principal ground for the appointment of a Receiver is, generally stated, danger of the loss of or injury to the property or thing in controversy before the Court can make a disposition thereof by a final decree on the merits" (see Schindler v. George Ringler & Co., 206 AD at 695, citing Hastings v. Tousey, 121 AD 815 [1923]).