From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Richards v. Pathmark Food Store

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 22, 1985
112 A.D.2d 360 (N.Y. App. Div. 1985)

Opinion

July 22, 1985

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Lawrence, J.).


Order affirmed, with costs.

Special Term did not abuse its discretion in limiting the use of disclosure devices pursuant to CPLR 3103 where it appeared, as the court noted, that "the disclosure devices being employed by defendants herein may be an unreasonable annoyance, intended to harass and overburden plaintiff and his counsel" ( see, Matter of Westchester Rockland Newspapers v. Marbach, 66 A.D.2d 335). Mollen, P.J., Mangano, O'Connor and Weinstein, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Richards v. Pathmark Food Store

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 22, 1985
112 A.D.2d 360 (N.Y. App. Div. 1985)
Case details for

Richards v. Pathmark Food Store

Case Details

Full title:NOEL RICHARDS, Respondent, v. PATHMARK FOOD STORE et al., Appellants

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Jul 22, 1985

Citations

112 A.D.2d 360 (N.Y. App. Div. 1985)

Citing Cases

Youngquist v. Youngquist

Ordered that one bill of costs is awarded to the respondent. The Supreme Court has broad discretion to…

Glachman v. Perlen

Such order shall be designed to prevent unreasonable annoyance, expense, embarrassment, disadvantage, or…