New York City Housing Authority v. Starr Indemnity & Liability Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

New York City Housing Authority v. Starr Indemnity & Liability Co.

139 A.D.3d 645, 30 N.Y.S.3d 867

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided May 31, 2016·No. 1340N 450151/14·Published

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Ellen M. Coin, J.), entered on or about April 21, 2015, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, denied plaintiff’s motion to strike certain language in defendant insurers’ discovery demands and to limit the scope of those demands, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The motion court providently exercised its discretion in denying plaintiff’s motion to strike certain parts of defendants’ discovery demands and to limit the scope of its own preliminary conference order (see e.g. Reyes v Riverside Park Community [Stage I], Inc., 47 AD3d 599 [1st Dept 2008]). The information defendants seek is material and necessary to the defense of this action (see e.g. Johnson v National R. R. Passenger Corp., 83 AD2d 916 [1st Dept 1981]).

We have considered plaintiff’s remaining arguments and find them unavailing.

Concur — Friedman, J.P., Renwick, Moskowitz, Richter and Kapnick, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Ellen M. Coin, J.), entered on or about April 21, 2015, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, denied plaintiff’s motion to strike certain language in defendant insurers’ discovery demands and to limit the scope of those demands, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The motion court providently exercised its discretion in denying plaintiff’s motion to strike certain parts of defendants’ discovery demands and to limit the scope of its own preliminary conference order (see e.g. Reyes v Riverside Park Community [Stage I], Inc., 47 AD3d 599 [1st Dept 2008]). The information defendants seek is material and necessary to the defense of this action (see e.g. Johnson v National R. R. Passenger Corp., 83 AD2d 916 [1st Dept 1981]).

We have considered plaintiff’s remaining arguments and find them unavailing.

Concur — Friedman, J.P., Renwick, Moskowitz, Richter and Kapnick, JJ.

New York City Housing Authority v. Starr Indemnity & Liability Co., 139 A.D.3d 645, 30 N.Y.S.3d 867 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2016).

Pincite

139 A.D.3d 645 (New York City Housing Authority v. Starr Indemnity & Liability Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related