Conti v. Allstate Insurance

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Conti v. Allstate Insurance

47 A.D.2d 918, 367 N.Y.S.2d 45, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9355

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided April 21, 1975·Published

Opinion

In an action, inter alla, to recover damages for defamation and for violations of the State antitrust laws, defendant appeals, as limited by its notice of appeal and briefs, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated October 18, 1974, as denied so much of its cross motion as sought a protective order. Order reversed insofar as appealed from, with $20 costs and disbursements, and that branch of defendant’s cross motion which sought a protective order granted. Settle order on five days’ notice in accordance with the proposed protective order submitted by defendant to Special Term. We find that there exists reasonable cause to believe that plaintiffs might use the information sought for a purpose other than in furtherance of the pending litigation. Therefore, the motion for a protective order should have been granted. Gulotta, P. J., Martuscello, Latham, Cohalan and Shapiro, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

In an action, inter alla, to recover damages for defamation and for violations of the State antitrust laws, defendant appeals, as limited by its notice of appeal and briefs, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated October 18, 1974, as denied so much of its cross motion as sought a protective order. Order reversed insofar as appealed from, with $20 costs and disbursements, and that branch of defendant’s cross motion which sought a protective order granted. Settle order on five days’ notice in accordance with the proposed protective order submitted by defendant to Special Term. We find that there exists reasonable cause to believe that plaintiffs might use the information sought for a purpose other than in furtherance of the pending litigation. Therefore, the motion for a protective order should have been granted. Gulotta, P. J., Martuscello, Latham, Cohalan and Shapiro, JJ., concur.

Conti v. Allstate Insurance, 47 A.D.2d 918, 367 N.Y.S.2d 45, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9355 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1975).

Pincite

47 A.D.2d 918 (Conti v. Allstate Insurance) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.