Vyas v. Campbell
| Citation | 771 N.Y.S.2d 375,4 A.D.3d 417,2004 NY Slip Op 00657 |
| Decision Date | 09 February 2004 |
| Docket Number | 2003-01786. |
| Parties | RAJEEV VYAS et al., Appellants, v. EDGAR P. CAMPBELL, Respondent. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court Appellate Division |
Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
On March 13, 2001, at 6:35 P.M., the defendant, an attorney who had recently concluded a deposition, was on his way to visit his daughter when his car collided head-on with a vehicle driven by the plaintiff Rajeev Vyas in which the plaintiff Sharon Malia was a passenger. During the course of the ensuing personal injury action, the plaintiffs demanded that the defendant produce a copy of his "business diary in complete form for March 13, 2001." The Supreme Court denied that branch of the plaintiffs' motion which was to strike the defendant's answer unless he complied with the discovery demand. The Supreme Court held that the plaintiffs had other means by which to discover the information that they were seeking. We affirm on the ground that there was no indication of what it is the plaintiffs are seeking to discover, and that there was no showing that disclosure of this portion of the defendant's "business diary" is "material and necessary" (CPLR 3101 [a]).
In support of the plaintiffs' motion to strike the defendant's answer unless the defendant complied with their notice to produce his "business diary" for March 13, 2001, the plaintiffs' attorney merely speculated that something in the diary might support the hypothesis that the defendant was suffering from fatigue at the time of the accident. While the "material and necessary" standard set forth in CPLR 3101 (a) is to be liberally construed (see Shanahan v Bambino, 271 AD2d 519 [2000]), this does not mean that litigants have carte blanche to demand production of whatever documents they speculate might contain something helpful. "It is incumbent on the party seeking disclosure to demonstrate that the method of discovery sought will result in the disclosure of relevant evidence or is reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Forman v. Henkin
...evidence or is reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of information bearing on the claims' " (Vyas v. Campbell, 4 A.D.3d 417, 418, 771 N.Y.S.2d 375 [2d Dept.2004], quoting Crazytown Furniture v. Brooklyn Union Gas Co., 150 A.D.2d 420, 421, 541 N.Y.S.2d 30 [2d Dept.1989] ; see also ......
-
Baker v. Comprehensive Mental Assessment & Med. Care
...have carte blache to demand production of whatever documents they speculate might contain something helpful.” Vyas v. Campbell, 4 A.D.3d 417, 771 N.Y.S.2d 375 (2d Dep't 2004). “It is incumbent on the parties seeking disclosure to demonstrate that the method of discovery sought will result i......
-
Schmidt v. Metro. Transp. Auth.
...bearing on the claims.'" Gomez v. State of New York, 106 A.D.3d 870, 965 N.Y.S.2d 542 (2d Dept. 2013) quoting Vyas v. Campbell, 4 A.D.3d 417, 775 N.Y.S.2d 375 (2d Dept. 2004). New York has long favored "open and far-reaching pretrial discovery." Kavanagh v. Ogden Alliance Maintenance Corp.,......
-
Matter of Joseph v. Desroches, Joseph & Scott, M.D., P.C., 2008 NY Slip Op 33333(U) (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 11/19/2008)
...of relevant evidence or is reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of information bearing on the claims.'" Vyas v. Campbell, 4 A.D.3d 417 (2nd Dept. 2004); Beckles v. Kingsbrook Jewish Medical Center, 36 A.D.3d 733 (2nd Dept. 2007); Auerbach v. Klein, 30 A.D.3d 451 (2nd Dept. 2006); ......
-
Objecting during depositions
...the discovery of admissible evidence. Quinones v. 9 E. 69th St., LLC , 132 A.D.3d 750, 18 N.Y.S.3d 106 (2d Dept. 2015); Vyas v. Campbell , 4 A.D.3d 417, 771 N.Y.S.2d 375 (2d Dept. 2004); Mora v. St. Vincent’s Cath. Med. Ctr. , 8 Misc. 3d 868, 800 N.Y.S.2d 298 (Sup. Ct., New York Cnty., 2005......
-
Objecting during depositions
...broader than at trial because the questioning need only be calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Vyas v. Campbell , 4 A.D.3d 417, 771 N.Y.S.2d 375 (2d Dept. 2004); Quinones v. 9 E. 69th St., LLC , 132 A.D.3d 750, 750, 18 N.Y.S.3d 106, 108 (2d Dept. 2015); Mora v. Saint......
-
Objecting during depositions
...broader than at trial because the questioning need only be calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Vyas v. Campbell , 4 A.D.3d 417, 771 N.Y.S.2d 375 (2d Dept. 2004); Quinones v. 9 E. 69th St., LLC , 132 A.D.3d 750, 750, 18 N.Y.S.3d 106, 108 (2d Dept. 2015); Mora v. Saint......
-
Objecting during depositions
...broader than at trial because the questioning need only be calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Vyas v. Campbell , 4 A.D.3d 417, 771 N.Y.S.2d 375 (2d Dept. 2004); Quinones v. 9 E. 69th St., LLC , 132 A.D.3d 750, 750, 18 N.Y.S.3d 106, 108 (2d Dept. 2015); Mora v. Saint......