Miller v. Miller

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Miller v. Miller

70 A.D.2d 571, 417 N.Y.S.2d 867, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11963

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedMay 31, 1979

StatusPublished

This text of 70 A.D.2d 571 (Miller v. Miller) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Miller v. Miller, 70 A.D.2d 571, 417 N.Y.S.2d 867, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11963 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1979).

Pincite

Opinion

— Order, Supreme Court, New Yprk County, entered March 12, 1979, modified to grant the motion for a protective order, on the law and in the exercise of discretion, without prejudice to an appropriately limited notice or motion for discovery, without costs, and otherwise affirmed. Even, as modified, by Special Term in respect of time covered and documents to be produced, the notice of examination remains so broad as to constitute a "fishing expedition”. This disposition is without prejudice to a notice pursuant to CPLR 3120 or by notice under CPLR 3111, calling for documents obviously connected with the legitimate subject matter of the examination (see 3A Weinstein-Korn-Miller, NY Civ Prac, par 3111.10). It would be appropriate if plaintiff is without such requisite knowledge of documents as to be able to describe them properly, to proceed initially by appropriate deposition to secure the necessary information, as described in Rios v Donovan (21 AD2d 409, 414). Concur — Birns, J. P., Sandler, Sullivan, Lane and Markewich, JJ.

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

— Order, Supreme Court, New Yprk County, entered March 12, 1979, modified to grant the motion for a protective order, on the law and in the exercise of discretion, without prejudice to an appropriately limited notice or motion for discovery, without costs, and otherwise affirmed. Even, as modified, by Special Term in respect of time covered and documents to be produced, the notice of examination remains so broad as to constitute a "fishing expedition”. This disposition is without prejudice to a notice pursuant to CPLR 3120 or by notice under CPLR 3111, calling for documents obviously connected with the legitimate subject matter of the examination (see 3A Weinstein-Korn-Miller, NY Civ Prac, par 3111.10). It would be appropriate if plaintiff is without such requisite knowledge of documents as to be able to describe them properly, to proceed initially by appropriate deposition to secure the necessary information, as described in Rios v Donovan (21 AD2d 409, 414). Concur — Birns, J. P., Sandler, Sullivan, Lane and Markewich, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

70 A.D.2d 571, 417 N.Y.S.2d 867, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11963, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/miller-v-miller-nyappdiv-1979.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack