Gilman & Ciocia, Inc. v. Walsh
| Decision Date | 07 November 2007 |
| Docket Number | 2007-00779 |
| Citation | 2007 NY Slip Op 08410,845 N.Y.S.2d 124,45 A.D.3d 531 |
| Parties | GILMAN & CIOCIA, INC., Appellant, v. DAVID WALSH et al., Respondents. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
CPLR 3101 (a) requires, in pertinent part, "full disclosure of all matter material and necessary in the prosecution or defense of an action." However, the principle of "full disclosure" does not give a party the right to uncontrolled and unfettered disclosure, and the trial courts have "broad power to regulate discovery to prevent abuse" (Barouh Eaton Allen Corp. v International Bus. Machs. Corp., 76 AD2d 873, 874 [1980]).
It is well settled that "[t]he supervision of disclosure and the setting of reasonable terms and conditions therefor rests within the sound discretion of the trial court and, absent an improvident exercise of that discretion, its determination will not be disturbed" (Mattocks v White Motor Corp., 258 AD2d 628, 629 [1999]; see Kaplan v Herbstein, 175 AD2d 200 [1991]). Here, the plaintiff's document demands at issue were palpably improper in that they sought, inter alia, irrelevant and/or confidential information, or were overbroad and burdensome. Accordingly, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying that branch of the plaintiff's motion which was to compel the defendants to respond to the contested discovery demands and in granting that branch of the defendants' cross motion which was for a protective order with respect to the contested demands (see Astudillo v St. Francis-Beacon Extended Care Facility, Inc., 12 AD3d 469 [2004]).
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Matter of Joseph v. Desroches, Joseph & Scott, M.D., P.C., 2008 NY Slip Op 33333(U) (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 11/19/2008)
...disclosure, and the trial courts have `broad power to regulate discovery to prevent abuse' (citation omitted)." Gilman & Ciocia, Inc. v. Walsh, 45 A.D.3d 531 (2nd Dept. 2007); see, Seaman v. Wyckoff Heights Medical Center, Inc., 25 A.D.3d 598 (2nd Dept. 2006). "What is `material and necessa......
-
Walker v. Poko-St Anns L.P.
...and unfettered disclosure" (Merkos L 'Inyonei Chinuch, Inc. v Sharf, 59 A.D.3d 408 [2d Dept 2009]; Gilman & Ciocia, Inc. v Walsh, 45 A.D.3d 531 [2d Dept 2007]). "It is incumbent on the party seeking disclosure to demonstrate that the method of discovery sought will result in the disclosure ......
-
Travelers Cas. and Sur. Co. of Am. v. Bank of Am., N.A., 2009 NY Slip Op 33014(U) (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 12/16/2009)
...demands" be honored, European American Bank v. Competition Motors, Ltd., 186 A.D.2d 784, 785 (2d Dept. 1992); Gilman & Ciocia, Inc. v. Walsh, 45 A.D.3d 531 (2d Dept. 2007), particularly where the demands at issue would attach "undue attention" to collateral matters, Blittner v. Berg and Dor......
-
Gomez v. State
...defense of an action." A party, however, does not have the right to "uncontrolled and unfettered disclosure" (Gilman & Ciocia, Inc. v. Walsh, 45 A.D.3d 531, 531, 845 N.Y.S.2d 124; see Barouh Eaton Allen Corp. v. International Bus. Machs. Corp., 76 A.D.2d 873, 429 N.Y.S.2d 33). " ‘It is incu......