Gardner v. Honda Motor Co.
187 A.D.2d 1033, 593 N.Y.S.2d 479, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14085
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided November 18, 1992·Published
Opinion
Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Plaintiff has failed to meet his burden of proving that the materials sought by defendants are exempt from disclosure (see generally, Koump v Smith, 25 NY2d 287, 294-295; Central Buffalo Project Corp. v Rainbow Salads, 140 AD2d 943, 944). The court did not abuse its discretion in denying plaintiff’s motion for a protective order. (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Wolfgang, J. — Discovery.) Present — Green, J. P., Pine, Balio, Boehm and Davis, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Gardner v. Honda Motor Co., 187 A.D.2d 1033, 593 N.Y.S.2d 479, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14085 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).
187 A.D.2d 1033 (Gardner v. Honda Motor Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Koump v. Smith
250 N.E.2d 857 (New York Court of Appeals, 1969)
Central Buffalo Project Corp. v. Rainbow Salads, Inc.
140 A.D.2d 943 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1988)