Weinstock v. Goldstein

Full title: ISRAEL WEINSTOCK, Appellant, v. STANLEY GOLDSTEIN, Respondent

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

Date published: Jun 30, 1997

240 A.D.2d 732 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)

660 N.Y.S.2d 985

Opinion

June 30, 1997

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

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

The supervision of discovery, as well as the setting of reasonable terms for discovery, rests within the sound discretion of the trial court. Its determination should not be disturbed absent a showing that it improvidently exercised that discretion ( see, Matter of U.S. Pioneer Elecs. Corp. [Nikko Elec. Corp.], 47 N.Y.2d 914; Salkey v. Mott, 237 A.D.2d 504). Upon our review of the record, we conclude that the Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion.

Bracken, J.P., O'Brien, Santucci, Friedmann and Goldstein, JJ., concur.