From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Lopez v. Huntington Autohaus LTD

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 1, 1989
150 A.D.2d 351 (N.Y. App. Div. 1989)

Opinion

May 1, 1989

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Christ, J.).


Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, with one bill of costs, those branches of the motion of the defendant Huntington Autohaus Ltd. which were for a protective order striking numbers 5 and 6 of the plaintiffs' interrogatories are granted and those branches of the plaintiffs' cross motion which were to compel it to answer those interrogatories are denied, those branches of the motion of the defendant Volkswagen of America, Inc., which were for a protective order striking numbers 3, 4, 5 and 6 of the plaintiffs' interrogatories are granted, and those branches of the plaintiffs' cross motion which were to compel it to answer those interrogatories are denied.

CPLR 3101(a) provides that "[t]here shall be full disclosure of all evidence material and necessary in the prosecution or defense of an action". While the disclosure provisions of the CPLR are to be liberally construed (see, Cynthia B. v New Rochelle Hosp. Med. Center, 60 N.Y.2d 452, 461), with the test being one of "usefulness and reason" (see, Allen v Crowell-Collier Publ. Co., 21 N.Y.2d 403, 406), "this is not to say that carte blanche demands are to be honored, and those demands which are unduly burdensome or lack specificity or seek privileged matter or seek irrelevant information or are otherwise improper must be denied" (see, Capoccia, P.C. v Spiro, 88 A.D.2d 1100, 1101). Under such circumstances, vacatur of the discovery demand is the appropriate remedy rather than its pruning (see, Handy v Geften Realty, 129 A.D.2d 556, 557).

The subject interrogatories are so overbroad and seek so much irrelevant and immaterial information that they are unduly burdensome and oppressive. The interrogatories request disclosure with respect to vehicle components that are not involved in this case, and on warranty claims or other legal proceedings, regardless of their nature or forum, which involve matters not even remotely similar to the causes of action of these plaintiffs. Moreover, interrogatory number 6 addressed to Volkswagen of America, Inc., seeks unlimited information as to all inquiries or investigations made at any level of government since mid-1984 with respect to all 1984 Audi 5000's sold by that appellant anywhere in the world.

The burden of serving a proper demand is upon counsel, and it is not for the courts to correct a palpably bad one (Cramp v Cramp, 114 A.D.2d 835, 836; Martino v Mid-Island Hosp., 73 A.D.2d 592) ; accordingly, the interrogatories in question are striken. Bracken, J.P., Kooper, Harwood and Balletta, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Lopez v. Huntington Autohaus LTD

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 1, 1989
150 A.D.2d 351 (N.Y. App. Div. 1989)
Case details for

Lopez v. Huntington Autohaus LTD

Case Details

Full title:ANDREW F. LOPEZ et al., Respondents, v. HUNTINGTON AUTOHAUS LTD. et al.…

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

Date published: May 1, 1989

Citations

150 A.D.2d 351 (N.Y. App. Div. 1989)
540 N.Y.S.2d 874

Citing Cases

Star Auto Sales of Queens, LLC v. Filardo

A party, however, "is not entitled to unlimited, uncontrolled, unfettered disclosure" ( Fox v. Roman Catholic…

HSBC Bank USA, NA v. Hagerman

CPLR § 3101 (a). Lopez v. Huntington Autohaus Ltd., 150 AD 2d 351, 352 [2d Dept 1989]; quoting Allen v.…