Citation Numbers: 158 A.D.2d 787, 551 N.Y.S.2d 77, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 882
Judges: Mahoney
Filed Date: 2/1/1990
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 10/31/2024
On August 10, 1984, plaintiff allegedly was injured when an
Plaintiff then requested that defendant search all of its district offices for these records. Defendant resisted this demand as unduly burdensome and overly broad. Plaintiff thereafter moved to compel the discovery and defendant cross-moved for a protective order. Supreme Court denied defendant’s cross motion and ordered defendant to comply with plaintiff’s demand on condition of default. This appeal by defendant ensued.
We find no abuse of Supreme Court’s broad discretion in supervising the liberal disclosure requirements of the CPLR (see, e.g., Bumbulsky v McCarthy, 151 AD2d 857, 858-859). We were advised at oral argument that the Moduline 100 escalator has been available for only some 15 years and it strikes us that the requested records will be readily ascertainable. Accordingly, we see no error in Supreme Court’s order denying defendant’s cross motion for a protective order and directing defendant to comply with plaintiff’s demand on condition of default.
Order affirmed, without costs. Mahoney, P. J., Kane, Casey, Levine and Harvey, JJ., concur.