Opinion
February 16, 2000
Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Onondaga County, McCarthy, J. — Discovery.
PRESENT: GREEN, A. P. J., HAYES, PIGOTT, JR., AND SCUDDER, JJ.
Order unanimously affirmed without costs.
Memorandum:
We reject the contention of plaintiff that Supreme Court abused its discretion in denying that portion of his motion seeking to compel discovery and granting that part of defendant's cross motion seeking a protective order. The trial court is vested with broad discretion in supervising pretrial discovery ( see, Farrakhan v. N YP. Holdings, 226 A.D.2d 133, 135). Although CPLR 3101 (a) is to be interpreted liberally in favor of disclosure ( see, Andon v. 302-304 Mott St. Assocs., 257 A.D.2d 37, 40), a party may not be compelled to produce information that does not exist or that he or she does not control or possess, nor may a party be compelled to create new documents ( see, Durham Med. Search v. Physicians Intl. Search, 122 A.D.2d 529, 529-530). Here, the court was well within its discretion in fashioning an order that balanced the interests of the parties and curtailed the unduly burdensome demands of plaintiff. We have examined plaintiff's remaining contentions and conclude that they lack merit.