U.S. Pioneer Electronics Corp. v. Nikko Elec. Corp. of America
| Citation | 47 N.Y.2d 914,393 N.E.2d 478,419 N.Y.S.2d 484 |
| Parties | , 393 N.E.2d 478 In the Matter of U. S. PIONEER ELECTRONICS CORP., Appellant, v. NIKKO ELECTRIC CORP. OF AMERICA, Respondent. In the Matter of U. S. PIONEER ELECTRONICS CORP., Appellant, v. ROTEL OF AMERICA, INC., Respondent. |
| Decision Date | 26 June 1979 |
| Court | New York Court of Appeals |
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs, in each case.
Petitioner has commenced an action in Ohio against a chain of retail hi-fidelity dealers for violations of that State's Deceptive Trade Practices Act, unfair competition and breach of contract. In aid of that action petitioner seeks the production of documents and the testimony of the sales managers or other appropriate officers or employees of the two corporate respondents as nonparty witnesses. In the Nikko proceeding Supreme Court, Nassau County, vacated a prior ex parte order directing discovery; in Rotel, Supreme Court, Westchester County, ordered the requested discovery. On appeal the Appellate Division, "on the law and as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice" in each case, directed parallel discovery to the extent and on the terms particularized in the court's decisions. It concluded, "(a)s thus limited, petitioner will be able to achieve the disclosure to which it has demonstrated its entitlement, without simultaneously causing undue and unreasonable annoyance, disadvantage or other prejudice to the nonparty witness being examined." Petitioner now appeals to our court from these two orders. *
The determination as to the terms and provisions of discovery as regulated to prevent abuse by protective orders under CPLR 3103 (subd. (a)) rests in the sound discretion of the court to which application is made, subject to review by the intermediate appellate court, here the Appellate Division. Our court will not disturb the determinations made by that court in the absence of a demonstration that as a matter of law there has been an abuse of discretion. (3A Weinstein-Korn-Miller, NY Civ.Prac., par. 3103.01.) No such demonstration has been made in either of these cases.
...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Scalone v. Phelps Memorial Hosp. Center
... ... New York City Health & Hosps. Corp., 106 A.D.2d 500, 483 N.Y.S.2d 37). However, ... Pioneer Elec. Corp. [v. Nikko ... Elec. Corp. of ... ...
-
Pettinato v. EQR-Rivertower, LLC
...New York , 192 A.D.3d 606, 606, 144 N.Y.S.3d 705 [1st Dept. 2021] ; see Matter of U.S. Pioneer Elecs. Corp. [Nikko Elec.Corp. of Am.] , 47 N.Y.2d 914, 916, 419 N.Y.S.2d 484, 393 N.E.2d 478 [1979] ["The determination as to the terms and provisions of discovery ... rests in the sound discreti......
-
Ozen v. Yilmaz
...discretion under CPLR 3103(a) to regulate the "use of any disclosure device" (see, U.S. Pioneer Electronics Corp. v. Nikko Electric Corp. of America, 47 N.Y.2d 914, 916, 419 N.Y.S.2d 484, 393 N.E.2d 478; Nitz v. Prudential Bache Securities, 102 A.D.2d 914, 915, 477 N.Y.S.2d 479). The court ......
-
Lipin v. Bender
... ... Intl. Corp. v. Chemical Bank, 78 N.Y.2d 371, 377, 380, 575 ... hands" is not, however, the issue before us. Relief was sought under CPLR 3103(c), which ... Pioneer Elecs. Corp. v. Nikko Elec. Corp., 47 N.Y.2d ... ...