N.Y. C.P.L.R. § 3101

Section 3101(a) places the burden on the party seeking disclosure to show that the requested discovery will yield relevant evidence.

Carp v. Marcus · filed 1986-01-16(a)

The burden is upon the party seeking disclosure to demonstrate that the method of discovery sought will result in disclosure of relevant evidence (see, Herbst v Bruhn, 106 AD2d 546, 549).

Section 3101(a) permits disclosure of material useful to preparing a case, including documents that may lead to admissible proof even if the documents themselves are inadmissible.

Jonmaire v. Town of West Seneca · filed 1986-05-23(a)

The scope of disclosure is defined by CPLR 3101 (a), which provides that "[t]here shall be full disclosure of all evidence material and necessary in the prosecution or defense of an action, regardless of the burden of proof’. ... Applying these principles, we find that the court improvidently deleted items 5, 7 and 8 of plaintiff’s notice.

Section 3101(a) calls for broad disclosure of evidence that may be useful and relevant to a claim or defense.

McClusky v. Recreational Distributors Warehouse, Inc. · filed 1986-05-23(a)

Plaintiff demonstrated that the witness Wright was unable to furnish information which is properly subject to disclosure under CPLR 3101. ... Here, plaintiff has demonstrated that the information sought may be useful and relevant on the issue of the extent of Coleco’s knowledge of any danger resulting from the use of slides for entry into their pools and whether the warnings, if any, given to users of the subject pool were adequate in the circumstances.

Section 3101(a) requires liberal disclosure of evidence material and necessary to an action.

Mooney v. Superintendent of New York State Police · filed 1986-05-29(a)

CPLR 3101 (a) mandates "full disclosure of all evidence material and necessary in the prosecution or defense of an action”, and is to be interpreted liberally in favor of disclosure (Allen v Crowell-Collier Pub. Co., 21 NY2d 403, 406-407).

Section 3101(a) requires disclosure of information material and relevant to the prosecution or defense of an action.

Suzuki Performance of Huntington, Ltd. v. Utica Mutual Insurance · filed 1986-06-16(a)

Since the information sought by the plaintiff is material and relevant, it should be disclosed.

CPLR 3101 requires disclosure of relevant information sought in good faith for possible use as evidence or in rebuttal or cross-examination.

Shalhoub v. Viverito · filed 1986-10-21

CPLR 3101 provides that there be full disclosure of all evidence material and necessary in the prosecution and defense of an action. Disclosure extends to all relevant information calculated to lead to relevant evidence. If this information is sought in good faith for possible use as evidence-in-chief or in rebuttal or cross-examination, it should be considered material and necessary in the prosecution or defense of an action.

Section 3101(a) permits disclosure of material and relevant evidence, including records concerning a possible cause of an accident.

Kadan v. Volkswagen of America, Inc. · filed 1987-04-30(a)

CPLR 3101 (a) authorizes the disclosure of all material and relevant evidence and is accorded a liberal construction in favor of disclosure (see, Nitz v Prudential-Bache Sec., 102 AD2d 914, 915).

Section 3101(a) requires disclosure of facts bearing on the controversy that will assist in preparing for trial.

LoGatto v. LoGatto · filed 1987-05-11(a)

The scope of disclosure is defined by CPLR 3101 (a), which states that "[tjhere shall be full disclosure of all evidence material and necessary in the prosecution or defense of an action, regardless of the burden of proof’. ... With these principles in mind, we find the court’s determination to be within the scope of its authority and necessary for the prosecution of this action.

Section 3101 requires disclosure of financial statements when a claim for unspecified compensatory damages makes them material and necessary.

Seneca Knitting Mills Corp. v. Wilkes · filed 1986-05-23

CPLR 3101 requires disclosure of all evidence material and necessary in the prosecution or defense of an action, and plaintiff, in seeking unspecified compensatory damages for defendant’s alleged misuse of an invention, has made such evidence material and necessary.

Section 3101(a) permits disclosure of information about similar prior acts when it is relevant to intent or the absence of mistake.

Davis v. Solondz · filed 1986-07-17(a)

Because defendant’s unlawful intent is in issue, plaintiff may properly seek the disclosure of the evidence requested by demand No. 6 since any information produced in response thereto would be relevant to the issue of intent and absence of mistake.

Section 3101(a) permits discovery of information material and necessary to a party’s defense.

Loubeau v. John Hancock Mutual Insurance · filed 1986-09-15(a)

The information sought to be discovered by the appellants herein is clearly "material and necessary” to their defense in the instant wrongful death action (see, CPLR 3101 [a]; Allen v Crowell-Collier Pub. Co., 21 NY2d 403, 406; Fell v Presbyterian Hosp., 98 AD2d 624). Accordingly, Special Term erred in denying their discovery requests.

Section 3101(a) does not require a plaintiff who is not a security expert to disclose her personal opinion about what campus security measures were needed.

Humiston v. Rochester Institute of Technology · filed 1986-12-19(a)

Plaintiff is not an expert on campus security and her personal opinion does not constitute "material and necessary” evidence which must be disclosed to defendant (CPLR 3101 [a]).

Section 3101(a) requires a party seeking medical records to show that they are relevant and material and necessary to the action.

Sibley v. Hayes 73 Corp. · filed 1987-01-20(a)

Assuming, arguendo, a waiver of the mother’s privilege with respect to her entire medical history could be found upon this record, the appellants have presented no evidence that the medical records sought relating to the mother’s medical history, other than for the period when the infant plaintiff was in útero, are relevant to the issue in controversy and are material and necessary to the defense of this action (CPLR 3101 [a]; see, Herbst v Bruhn, 106 AD2d 546, supra; Schlarlack v Richmond Mem. Hosp., 102 AD2d 886, supra). Therefore, the appellants would not be entitled to those medical records.

Section 3101 limits discovery to material relevant to the issues in the proceeding.

Matter of 425 Park Ave. Co. v. Fin. Adm'r of the City of New York · filed 1986-12-16

Under these circumstances, the requested data would have no relevancy to any issues that may be raised in this proceeding (CPLR 3101). Accordingly, it was an abuse of discretion as a matter of law to grant petitioner’s motion for discovery of the verification of sales data with the S/I notations.

Section 3101(a) allows broad disclosure of material and necessary evidence, but a deposition that lacks a useful discovery purpose may be barred.

Boutique Fabrics, Inc. v. Bergdorf Goodman, Inc. · filed 1987-04-28(a)

We find Special Term’s denial of a protective order under the circumstances presented here to constitute an abuse of discretion. Even under the broad test for materiality of " 'usefulness and reason’ ” (Hoenig v Westphal, supra, at 608), this effort to obtain additional discovery falls short.

Section 3101(a) leaves a request to replace depositions with written questions to the trial court’s discretion.

Boylin v. Eagle Telephonics · filed 1987-05-11(a)

A motion for a protective order (CPLR 3101 [a]) is addressed to the sound discretion of the trial court (Matter of U. S. Pioneer Elecs. Corp. [Nikko Elec. Corp.], 47 NY2d 914) and, on this record, we find no basis for disturbing the trial court’s denial of the motion.

Section 3101 requires disclosure of material and necessary information calculated to lead to relevant evidence.

In re R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. · filed 1987-07-10

CPLR 3101 provides that "[t]here shall be a full disclosure of all evidence”, which means all relevant information calculated to lead to relevant evidence. ... The data requested must be material and necessary although it need not be indispensible.

Section 3101(a) permits disclosure of a mother’s medical and employment records when they are material and necessary to determining the cause of her child’s alleged birth defects, including records from outside the pregnancy.

St. Amand v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. · filed 1988-02-03(a)

The underlying issue herein is the conflict between physician-patient privilege (CPLR 4504), and "full disclosure of all evidence material and necessary in the prosecution or defense of an action” (CPLR 3101 [a]). The requested medical and employment records of Jessie St. Amand, which plaintiff had stipulated to release, the court finds necessary, material and relevant to the issues of causation, and, thus, are discoverable and not limited to infant plaintiff in útero.

Section 3101(a) permits disclosure of nonparty testimony material and necessary to an application to modify visitation.

Susan A. v. Steven J. A. · filed 1988-06-27(a)

Such testimony is discoverable as "evidence material and necessary in the prosecution or defense of an action” (CPLR 3101 [a]).

Section 3101(a) requires broad disclosure of material and necessary evidence, including a supplemental report from a physician who previously examined the party.

Peritz v. Kaye · filed 1988-06-29(a)

CPLR 3101 (a) directs "full disclosure of all evidence material and necessary in the prosecution or defense of an action, regardless of the burden of proof’.... Applying the general discovery principles to this case, I conclude that Dr. Sheppard’s supplemental report must be produced.

Section 3101(a) permits disclosure of corporate records that are useful to assessing undue influence or fraud in a will contest.

In re the Estate of Du Bray · filed 1987-07-30(a)

The test of what is material and necessary in discovery is one of usefulness and reason (Cooperstein v Patrician Estates, 97 AD2d 426, 427). ... Moreover, the documents will provide evidence on decedent’s financial status, relevant to the issues of both fraud and undue influence.

A party seeking medical records under section 3101(a) must show that they are material and necessary to the action.

Cardillo v. Hillcrest General Hospital · filed 1987-11-02(a)

In any event, no probative evidence was ... adduced by the appellant to demonstrate that these records were material and necessary to the defense of this action (see, CPLR 3101 [a]; see, Herbst v Bruhn, 106 AD2d 546; Scharlack v Richmond Mem. Hosp., 102 AD2d 886).

Section 3101(a) permits discovery of recall information about similar vehicles when it may reveal defects, even if the vehicle at issue was not recalled.

Calo v. Ahearn · filed 1987-12-17(a)

Items 1 to 5 of the demand are material and necessary within the meaning of CPLR 3101 (a). ... However, it was within the legitimate scope of discovery to attempt to determine if the recall campaign erroneously omitted vehicles with the same or similar steering defects.

Section 3101(a) requires a party seeking a physical examination under CPLR 3121 to show that the evidence sought is material and necessary.

Doe v. Roe · filed 1988-03-14(a)

Second, the party seeking the test or examination must ordinarily demonstrate that the evidence sought is "material and necessary” pursuant to CPLR 3101 (a), referable to disclosure under CPLR 3121 (a) (see, Koump v Smith, supra). ... Even if the more lenient test of relevancy and materiality were applied, however, petitioners have not met their burden here.

CPLR 3101 allows broad discovery of evidence material and necessary to an action; unsupported claims of burden and irrelevance do not justify striking relevant interrogatories.

Ocean To Ocean Seafood Sales, Inc. v. Trans-O-Fish & Seafood Co. · filed 1988-03-15

CPLR 3101 provides for very broad discovery of any evidence that is "material and necessary” to the prosecution or defense of an action. In this case there is not the slightest doubt that the stricken interrogatories seek evidence that would be material and necessary in the prosecution of this action, since they bear directly on the critical issues of the solvency or insolvency of Trans-O-Fish at the time of its purchase of goods from plaintiff and the knowledge of the individual defendants as to the corporation’s alleged financial instability. Because the interrogatories are materially relevant, and defendants failed to substantiate their conclusory claims that the interrogatories are burdensome and irrelevant, we conclude that the motion court erred in granting the protective order as to these 12 interrogatories.

Section 3101(a) requires evidence sought through a physical examination in a matrimonial proceeding to be material and necessary.

Anne D. v. Raymond D. · filed 1988-05-06(a)

Therefore, when a party’s mental or physical condition is at issue in a matrimonial or related proceeding and the evidence sought is "material and necessary” pursuant to CPLR 3101 (a), courts have regularly permitted or ordered professional examinations. ... However, in the present case, defendant has failed to satisfy even the lesser of these two standards. The defendant’s moving papers are essentially conclusory in nature and devoid of any supporting affidavits or documentary evidence to substantiate his shocking charge.

Section 3101(d) limits the material obtainable through a notice for discovery and inspection.

Public Administrator v. Rad Oil Co. · filed 1988-09-19(d)

We have vacated the notice for discovery and inspection to the extent it seeks material beyond the scope of CPLR 3101 (d).

Section 3101(a) permits disclosure of facts bearing on the controversy that will assist in preparing for trial.

Miller v. United Parcel Service, Inc. · filed 1988-10-17(a)

The plaintiff’s motion for a protective order was properly denied. CPLR 3101 (a) has been liberally construed to permit a court to require disclosure of any facts bearing on the controversy which will assist in the preparation for trial.

The party seeking disclosure must show that the requested method will reveal relevant evidence or is reasonably calculated to lead to information bearing on the claims; bare assertions of relevance are insufficient.

Crazytown Furniture, Inc. v. Brooklyn Union Gas Co. · filed 1989-05-08(a)

It is incumbent on the party seeking disclosure to demonstrate that the method of discovery sought will result in the disclosure of relevant evidence or is reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of information bearing on the claims (see, Seigel, NY Prac § 345; CPLR 3101 [a]; 3120; Allen v CrowellCollier Publ. Co., supra; Herbst v Bruhn, 106 AD2d 546), and unsubstantiated bare allegations of relevancy are insufficient to establish the factual predicate regarding relevancy (see, Herbst v Bruhn, supra).

Section 3101(a) requires disclosure of information relevant to the prosecution or defense of an action.

Jarvis v. Jarvis · filed 1988-09-22(a)

CPLR 3101 (a) provides for "full disclosure of all evidence material and necessary in the prosecution or defense of an action”, by which is meant any information which is "relevant” to the action (Allen v Crowell-Collier Publ. Co., 21 NY2d 403 [1968]). It is not subject to dispute that the answers sought to be elicited from the witness and the file sought to be obtained are relevant to the action (see, Maggio v State of New York, 88 AD2d 1087 [3d Dept 1982]).

Section 3101(a) permits broad discovery of material and necessary evidence, including relevant evidence in child custody disputes.

Burgel v. Burgel · filed 1988-10-24(a)

CPLR 3101 (a) provides for discovery of all "material and necessary” evidence.

Section 3101(a) requires disclosure of a school’s policy on nonstudent access to its facilities when that policy is material to a negligence claim, even if a dram shop claim is unavailable.

Humiston v. Grose · filed 1988-11-15(a)

Plaintiffs inability to pursue a dram shop claim against R.I.T. does not mean that evidence concerning R.I.T.’s policy toward nonstudents using its facilities is irrelevant, hence nondiscoverable. The information sought by plaintiff is material to her claim against R.I.T. and defendant should be directed to answer these questions.

CPLR 3101(a) does not require disclosure of an insurer’s disputes with other policyholders when the insureds’ bad faith allegation concerns only the denial of their own claim.

Radicia v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. · filed 1988-12-23(a)

Information with respect to disputes with other policyholders is neither material nor necessary to this action (CPLR 3101 [a]) because plaintiffs’ allegation of bad faith relates only to defendant’s disclaimer of coverage on their claim (Town of Nassau v Phoenix Assur. Co., 57 AD2d 992, 993).

Section 3101(a) covers eyewitness testimony material and necessary to defending a personal injury action.

Stanzione v. Consumer Builders, Inc. · filed 1989-04-24(a)

The disclosure sought by Champion is "evidence material and necessary” for the defense of the plaintiffs’ action (CPLR 3101 [a]; see, Allen v Crowell-Collier Publ. Co., 21 NY2d 403, 406-407).

Section 3101(a) permits discovery of facts bearing on the controversy when they assist preparation for trial.

Datacom Systems Corp. v. New York Medical College · filed 1989-06-05(a)

The requirement in CPLR 3101 (a) that the evidence sought to be discovered must be "material and necessary” has been interpreted to include "any facts bearing on the controversy which will assist preparation for trial by sharpening the issues and reducing delay and prolixity” (Allen v Crowell-Collier Publ. Co., 21 NY2d 403, 406). The defendants made a sufficient showing that further discovery was necessary for the preparation of their defense to this action.

Section 3101(a) requires disclosure of facts that may help prepare for trial, including evidence possibly relevant to the action.

Szafranski v. Priebe · filed 1989-07-12(a)

That language is to be interpreted liberally to require disclosure of facts bearing on the controversy which will assist in preparation for trial. ... Plaintiff established that defendant’s karate manual is possibly relevant to prosecution of her personal injury action and thus "material and necessary” within the meaning of the statute.

Section 3101 requires disclosure of information underlying a complaint to the parties from whom the plaintiff seeks relief unless withholding it is justified.

Semi-Alloys, Inc. v. Electroalloy Corp. · filed 1989-05-15

However, the plaintiff advances no ground which justifies withholding from some of the parties from whom it seeks relief the information upon which it premises its complaint (see, CPLR 3101; Allen v Crowell-Collier Publ. Co., 21 NY2d 403; see also, Wilensky v JRB Mktg. & Opinion Research, 137 AD2d 520, 523; Citibank v Recycling Carroll Gardens, 116 AD2d 494; cf., Martin Mechanical Corp. v City of New York, 100 Misc 2d 1107, 1111).

Section 3101(a)(1) permits examination of a party’s officer about when disputed deeds were executed, delivered, and accepted.

Braun v. Consolidated Rail Corp. · filed 1990-02-26(a)(1)

However, we find that they are sufficient, under the circumstances, to warrant further discovery concerning the actual dates of execution, delivery and acceptance of the deeds (see, CPLR 3101 [a] [1]). The plaintiffs should be permitted to examine Richard C. Sullivan, who signed both deeds, in order to adduce evidence as to when the purported transfer of title occurred.

Section 3101(a)(1) calls for liberal disclosure of facts bearing on the controversy that will assist trial preparation.

Glachman v. Perlen · filed 1990-03-12(a)(1)

The words material and necessary are to be interpreted liberally to require disclosure upon request of any facts bearing on the controversy which will assist in the preparation for trial.

Section 3101(a) requires full disclosure of material and necessary evidence, with an expanded scope of discovery in custody and visitation matters.

Henry C. v. Faith A. · filed 1990-03-30(a)

It is well settled that in all civil actions discovery should be liberal. CPLR 3101 (a) specifically provides that there shall be full disclosure of all material and necessary evidence. The broad scope of discovery which is permitted in civil cases pursuant to the CPLR is subject to substantial expansion when the issue before the court concerns custody and/or visitation.

Section 3101 requires disclosure of evidence material and necessary to prosecuting or defending an action.

Flower Cart, Inc. v. Fackovec · filed 1990-07-12

Notwithstanding plaintiff’s arguments, it is clear to us that these documents are essential to the defense of plaintiff’s claims of wrongful diversion of customers and the failure to pay for certain merchandise ordered, as well as to the prosecution of the counterclaims. Evidence which is material and necessary in the prosecution or defense of an action is subject to disclosure.

Section 3101’s broad scope of disclosure supports inspection of corporate books and records when allegations call a tax-return-based stock valuation into question.

In re Bernstein · filed 1991-01-14

In light of the special nature of the disclosure proceeding within which the challenged order arises (see, Matter of Piccione, 57 NY2d 278; Matter of Granowitz, 150 AD2d 446; see also, Matter of Laflin, 128 Misc 2d 348), the broad scope of disclosure generally permitted (see, CPLR 3101; Allen v Crowell-Collier Publ. Co., 21 NY2d 403; cf., SCPA 102), and the petitioner’s allegations that value was fixed by the appellants pursuant to a tax return which deliberately understated net worth and that the filing of a later tax return was deliberately withheld with the expectation that decedent would soon die, we cannot say that the Surrogate’s Court improvidently exercised its discretion in directing the challenged disclosure.

Section 3101(a) does not require disclosure of a law firm’s financial records to value a partner’s interest when the partnership agreement fixes that interest at the partner’s capital account balance.

Dignan v. Dignan · filed 1989-12-20(a)

Here, it would not be material and necessary to consider the fair market value of plaintiff's partnership interest because the partnership agreement limits his share to its stated value, namely, the amount in his capital account.

Section 3101(a) requires the party seeking disclosure to establish that the requested evidence is material and necessary to the action.

Lebel v. City of New York · filed 1990-07-13(a)

Defendant’s notice of discovery and inspection dated May 12, 1988 was untimely under the court’s preliminary conference order dated March 25, 1986 and, in any event, defendant failed to establish that the evidence it sought was material and necessary in the defense of the action (see, CPLR 3101 [a]).

Section 3101(a) permits disclosure of documents material and necessary to prepare claims for trial.

Kidder, Peabody & Co. v. Condren · filed 1990-10-23(a)

In any event, the documents, sought by the plaintiff were clearly "material and necessary” in preparation for trial of plaintiff’s claims for breach of contract and breach of fiduciary duty.

Section 3101(a) gives trial courts discretion to deny disclosure requests for collateral materials that would obscure the issues in litigation.

Feeley v. Midas Properties, Inc. · filed 1990-12-03(a)

Contrary to the plaintiffs’ contentions, the Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in declining to compel the defendants to comply with certain of the plaintiffs’ requests for the production of documents pertaining to matters unrelated to the plaintiffs’ Carmel, New York, Midas Muffler franchise. It is well settled that trial courts "possess a wide discretion to decide whether information sought is 'material and necessary’ ” ... in light of the issues in litigation.

Section 3101 shields privileged matter and attorney work product from disclosure and limits disclosure of material prepared for litigation.

County of Delaware v. J & D Distributing & Manufacturing, Inc. · filed 1990-05-31

For instance, certain of the documents were protected by the attorney-client privilege and therefore were not subject to disclosure (CPLR 3101 [b]; see, City of Elmira v Larry Walter, Inc., 89 AD2d 645). Other documents were, for instance, either attorney’s work product (CPLR 3101 [c]) or material prepared for litigation (CPLR 3101 [d]).

CPLR 3101(a) permits a party to submit its own expert material to show that requested documents are material and necessary for discovery.

Piezotronics v. Change · filed 1990-07-13(a)

In our view, this restriction impermissibly denies plaintiff its procedural right to demonstrate the materiality and necessity of documents for discovery purposes (see, CPLR 3101 [a]). The court may, as it has in the past, rely upon the recommendation of a neutral expert in deciding whether to grant discovery of trade secrets, but it may not preclude plaintiff from submitting its own expert material in support of the discovery application.

Section 3101 (a) allows disclosure of material evidence but does not entitle a party to information whose materiality it fails to establish.

Altesman v. Eli Lilly & Co. · filed 1990-08-13(a)

The plaintiffs have failed to establish the materiality of the information sought with respect to the years 1951 through 1971 (the years following the plaintiff Linda Altesman’s birth), and thus are, not entitled to that information. We find that the information with respect to the years 1947 through 1950 is material to this action.

Section 3101(a) permits disclosure of information material to the action; the requesting party must establish materiality for the years covered by its request.

Wind v. Eli Lilly & Co. · filed 1990-08-13(a)

The plaintiffs have failed to establish the materiality of the information sought with respect to the years 1951 through 1971 (the years following the plaintiff Janice Wind’s birth), and are, thus, not entitled to that information.

Section 3101(a) permits a party to demand relevant evidence or information leading to evidence regardless of which party bears the burden of proof.

Eng'g v. INDUS · filed 1991-02-19(a)

Under the broad discovery statutes now in effect in this State, any party may demand disclosure of evidence, or information leading to evidence, relevant to the case without regard to the burden of proof (CPLR 3101 [a]; Allen v Crowell-Collier Publ. Co. , 21 N.Y.2d 403, 406; Siegel, NY Prac § 344, at 420-422).

Section 3101(a) permits examination of witnesses whose knowledge bears on the dispute, and Section 3101 requires continuing disclosure of related accident reports and an expert report when available.

Careccia v. Engstrom · filed 1991-03-07(a)

With respect to the first of the two remaining issues, we note that CPLR 3101 (a) has been liberally construed so as to "require disclosure of any facts bearing on the controversy that will assist trial preparation and reduce delay” (Bumbulsky v McCarthy, 151 AD2d 857, 859). ... Here, with respect to the County Executive, it is evident that he is a proper party for pretrial examination because he initiated a traffic study of the subject intersection and is in a position to testify as to the role played by the county in the maintenance of that intersection. Next, the engineering technician, who conducted a traffic study of the intersection and coauthored a memorandum to the county’s Superintendent of Highways, is clearly a proper subject of pretrial discovery. ... Finally, we note that CPLR 3101 imposes a continuing duty on the county to provide plaintiff with all accident reports related to the subject intersection, as well as the report of its expert when it is available.

Section 3101 permits disclosure of changes in an injured plaintiff’s condition when existing medical records and examination results are several years old.

Dwyer v. Mazzola · filed 1991-03-11

Moreover, the plaintiffs cannot claim that they lacked knowledge that the appellant would need this information since the medical and educational records as well as the results of the infant plaintiff’s medical examination were several years old and information regarding changes in his ... condition would be "material and necessary” to the defense of the case (see, CPLR 3101).

CPLR 3101(a) makes materials within its scope discoverable.

Briguglio v. RCP Associates · filed 1991-05-20(a)

However, we find that the material requested in the remainder of the demands at issue was within the scope of CPLR 3101 (a) and, hence, properly discoverable (see, Allen v Crowell-Collier Publ. Co., 21 NY2d 403, 406-407; AGH Distribs. v Silvertone Fasteners, 105 AD2d 648, 650).

Section 3101(a) does not require disclosure of broad information about other employees’ complaints when the requesting party has not shown its relevance or need.

Neuschatz v. Generale · filed 1991-09-12(a)

The information requested by plaintiff is not "material [or] necessary” (CPLR 3101 [a]), nor would disclosure "assist preparation for trial by sharpening the issues” (Allen v Crowell-Collier Publ. Co., 21 NY2d 403, 406). The discovery requested by plaintiff is clearly not relevant to the instant dispute as plaintiff has not demonstrated the need for such extensive information.

CPLR 3101(a) permits discovery of evidence reasonably related to the issues, including property ownership information needed to establish standing.

Southampton Taxpayers Against Reassessment v. Assessor of the Village of Southampton · filed 1991-10-15(a)

The test is one of "usefulness and reason”, and CPLR 3101 (a) should be construed to permit discovery of testimony " 'which is sufficiently related to the issues in litigation to make the effort to obtain it in preparation for trial reasonable’ ” (Allen v Crowell-Collier Publ. Co., supra, at 406-407). ... Contrary to the plaintiffs’ contentions, these issues are not immaterial to this action, since the plaintiffs will have to establish their standing to challenge the Village’s assessments by proving that they have an ownership interest in the subject properties.

Section 3101(a) permits disclosure of material and necessary evidence, with the burden on the party opposing disclosure to show that a request is improper.

MBF Clearing Corp. v. Shine · filed 1992-01-23(a)

In this case, plaintiff failed to meet that burden with respect to the remaining document requests which are the subject of the instant motion. Such requests seek information regarding plaintiffs internal practices and procedures, and changes thereof, as well as information regarding COMEX and NY-MEX investigations which were undertaken with respect to plaintiff and its president who is alleged to have been in a supervisory capacity with respect to the offending trades. This information is material and relevant to defendants’ affirmative defenses, which allege negligent practices or misfeasance by plaintiff claimed to be the proximate cause of plaintiffs injuries. We also find that such requests are sufficiently specific to allow plaintiff readily to identify and produce the documents.

Section 3101 permits disclosure of evidence material and necessary to a claim or defense, but does not permit discovery of unrelated sexual and medical history.

Greene v. Aberle · filed 1991-03-19

CPLR 3101 in turn provides that there shall be full disclosure of all evidence material and necessary in the prosecution or defense of an action. ... Information concerning Jill Aberle’s virginity, medical treatment, sexual history and possible spontaneous or clinical abortions in no way is related to any of the elements plaintiff must prove with respect to the foregoing issues.

Section 3101(a) permits discovery of documents relevant to whether a driver was acting on another party’s business at the time of an accident.

Keller v. Nieves · filed 1991-12-16(a)

We find that the challenged items in the plaintiffs notice to produce were relevant to the issue of whether Pardo was engaged in Church business at the time he and the plaintiff were involved in the accident. Thus, those items were properly discoverable (see, CPLR 3101 [a]; Allen v Crowell-Collier Publ. Co., 21 NY2d 403, 406-407).

Section 3101(a) requires a party seeking disclosure to establish that the requested information is material; a bare assertion that it might help calculate lost profits does not establish relevance.

Ritchie v. Carvel Corp. · filed 1992-02-24(a)

The plaintiffs failed to establish the materiality of the information that they sought (see, CPLR 3101 [a]), and their mere assertion that the information might be relevant in helping them determine their lost profits, without more, was insufficient to show relevancy (see, Crazytown Furniture v Brooklyn Union Gas Co., 150 AD2d 420, 421).

Section 3101(a) limits disclosure to material relevant to the issues in the action.

Hill v. Troy Savings Bank · filed 1992-07-09(a)

Accordingly, it is our view that the material sought by plaintiff is irrelevant and, therefore, not subject to discovery (see, CPLR 3101 [a]; Sagristano v Equitable Life Assur. Socy., 126 AD2d 541, 542; Mavroudis v State Wide Ins. Co., 102 AD2d 864).

Section 3101(a) favors broad disclosure of information material and necessary to prepare for trial, so exclusions should not be imposed lightly.

Duzon v. State · filed 1992-07-20(a)

The concept of excluding material from disclosure runs counter to the preferred goal of allowing free availability of all information material and necessary for trial preparation. (CPLR 3101 [a].) It should therefore not be imposed lightly. Where, as here, there has been no showing that Mr. Schneider was engaged in an official investigation on behalf of an appropriate review committee, we disallow the claim of privilege.

Section 3101(a) requires disclosure of all evidence material and necessary to prosecute or defend an action and supports liberal discovery.

Penchas v. Hilton Hotels Corp. · filed 1992-08-11(a)

The CPLR directs that there shall be 'full disclosure of all evidence material and necessary in the prosecution or defense of an action.’ (CPLR 3101 [a].) * * * [t]his statute embodies the policy determination that liberal discovery encourages fair and effective resolution of disputes on the merits, minimizing the possibility for ambush and unfair surprise.”

Section 3101(a) requires liberal disclosure of all evidence material and necessary to the defense of an action.

Morgan v. Dell Publishing Co. · filed 1992-08-17(a)

CPLR article 31, of which CPLR 3108 is a part, is to be construed liberally to effect its goal of full disclosure of "all evidence material and necessary in the * * * defense of an action” (CPLR 3101 [a]; see also, Allen v Crowell-Collier Publ. Co., 21 NY2d 403).

Section 3101(a) limits disclosure to material relevant to the case.

Fairview at Old Westfield, L.P. v. European American Bank · filed 1992-09-28(a)

We find that the Supreme Court improperly denied the branch of the defendant’s motion which was to strike the plaintiffs’ interrogatories and notice to produce, since the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate that any of the material in question is relevant to their case (see, CPLR 3101 [a]; Ritchie v Carvel Corp., 180 AD2d 788; Crazytown Furniture v Brooklyn Union Gas Co., 150 AD2d 420; Lopez v Huntington Autohaus, 150 AD2d 351).

Section 3101(a) requires broad disclosure of evidence that is material and necessary, including evidence reasonably useful for trial preparation.

U.S. Ice Cream Corp. v. Carvel Corp. · filed 1993-02-16(a)

It is well established that there shall be full disclosure of "all” evidence "material and necessary in the prosecution or defense of an action, regardless of the burden of proof’ (CPLR 3101 [a]), and that CPLR 3101 is to be "liberally” construed to require disclosure where the matter sought will assist in trial preparation by sharpening the issues (see, Allen v Crowell-Collier Publ. Co., 21 NY2d 403, 406; see also, Hoenig v Westphal, 52 NY2d 605, 608).

Section 3101(a) limits disclosure to documents material or necessary to the action.

Reiter v. Reiter · filed 1992-10-13(a)

However, the request should be limited to the period prior to the execution of the promissory notes, since any documents concerning the period thereafter would not be material or necessary in this action (see, CPLR 3101 [a]; Lazarus v Lazarus, 114 AD2d 1012; Pentecost v Pentecost, 125 AD2d 558).

Section 3101(a) requires full disclosure of evidence material and necessary to prosecuting or defending an action, while allowing courts to limit disclosure demands that pursue collateral matters.

European American Bank v. Competition Motors, Ltd. · filed 1992-10-26(a)

CPLR 3101 (a) requires that there ... "shall be full disclosure of all evidence material and necessary in the prosecution or defense of an action * * * by: ... "(1) a party”. In determining which evidence is "material and necessary”, the courts possess wide discretion ...

Section 3101(a)(4) permits discovery of documents that are material or necessary to prosecuting a lawsuit.

New Hyde Park Ophthalmology Associates v. Weiss · filed 1993-02-22(a)(4)

The plaintiffs have failed to show that certain of the financial documents requested in their notice of discovery and inspection are material or necessary to the prosecution of the lawsuit (see, CPLR 3101 [a] [4]; Blittner v Berg & Dorf 138 AD2d 439).

Section 3101(a) requires disclosure of medical records only when they are material and necessary to the action.

Kaplowitz v. Borden, Inc. · filed 1993-03-11(a)

That is not to say, however, that all medical records relating to the mother’s subsequent pregnancies are material and necessary to the defense of this action and must therefore be disclosed. (See, CPLR 3101 [a]; Sibley v Hayes 73 Corp., 126 AD2d 629, 631.)

Section 3101(a) permits broad discovery while giving trial courts discretion to determine what information is material and necessary.

NBT Bancorp, Inc. v. Fleet/Norstar Financial Group, Inc. · filed 1993-04-29(a)

Disclosure provisions of the CPLR are to be liberally construed; however, the scope of permissible discovery is not entirely unlimited and the trial court is invested with broad discretion to supervise discovery and to determine what is "material and necessary” as that phrase is used in CPLR 3101 (a) (see, Feeley v Midas Props., 168 AD2d 416, 417).

Section 3101(a) requires disclosure of information material and necessary to prosecuting an action.

Nass v. Marino · filed 1993-05-17(a)

The plaintiffs have failed to establish that the information sought is material and necessary to the prosecution of their action (see, CPLR 3101 [a]).

Section 3101 requires disclosure of all information relevant to the litigation.

Equitable Life Assurance Society of United States v. Rocanova · filed 1993-01-19

Defendant claims to have engaged in various businesses from which he was entitled to receive 50% of net earnings. In addition to documentation specific to defendant’s personal income, the income and regular business expenses of these enterprises are directly relevant to establishing the extent to which defendant misrepresented his individual income on the insurance applications. CPLR 3101 requires disclosure of all information relevant to the litigation (Allen v Crowell-Collier Publ. Co., 21 NY2d 403). Discovery of defendant’s true individual and business income is crucial to this case, and Supreme Court erred in granting defendant a protective order with respect to this information.

Section 3101 requires disclosure of relevant employment evidence when employment is material to an asserted Workers’ Compensation defense.

Croston v. Montefiore Hospital · filed 1993-03-18

However, since the Hospital has placed in issue the affirmative defense of Workers’ Compensation, the question of whether Dr. Sas worked for defendant Hospital on the critical date is material. If defendant Sas was an employee of defendant Hospital at that time, he might be immunized from liability pursuant to the Workers’ Compensation Law. Therefore, whether defendant Sas worked for defendant Montefiore Medical Center is clearly relevant. Accordingly, defendant Sas is directed to comply with plaintiffs’ demand pursuant to CPLR 3101 and 3120 by simply supplying a payroll stub or other proof of employment for the months of August through September 1988, inclusive.

Section 3101(a) permits additional discovery needed to clarify factual issues in a case.

Investigative Group Inc. v. Trump · filed 1993-09-14(a)

Additional discovery is necessary to elucidate the numerous factual issues present in this case (CPLR 3101 [a]).

Section 3101 permits depositions that could reveal material information needed to prepare a party’s case.

Graves v. Merco Properties, Inc. · filed 1993-11-29

Notwithstanding the Supreme Court’s broad discretion in this area, we conclude that it erred in not allowing the plaintiff to depose these defendants. CPLR 3101 has been construed to "require disclosure of any facts bearing on the controversy that will assist trial preparation and reduce delay” (Bumbulsky v McCarthy, 151 AD2d 857, 859).

CPLR 3101(a) permits discovery and inspection of material relevant to the defense of an action.

Mendelson v. Szczupak · filed 1993-12-27(a)

However, as the material requested in the defendant’s demand for discovery and inspection was material and relevant to the defense of the action, the court improvidently vacated the demand (see, CPLR 3101 [a]; Bigman v Dime Sav. Bank, 153 AD2d 912).

Section 3101(a) permits compelled disclosure when the requested material is narrowly focused and relevant to the issues raised by a party’s counterclaims.

Harradine v. Irvine · filed 1994-02-04(a)

Additionally, because the discovery sought by defendant was narrowly focused and relevant to the issues raised in his counterclaims, the motion to compel disclosure should have been granted (see generally, CPLR 3101 [a]; Allen v Crowell-Collier Publ. Co., 21 NY2d 403, 406).

Section 3101(a) permits discovery to be limited to materials relevant to determining the services rendered in creating a recovery fund.

Arowesty v. Weissman · filed 1994-04-04(a)

The court properly limited discovery to those materials relevant to a determination of the services rendered in creating the recovery fund (see, CPLR 3101 [a]).

CPLR 3101(a) permits disclosure of material and necessary evidence, and courts have broad discretion to reject irrelevant discovery requests.

Higgins v. Montemurro · filed 1994-04-21(a)

Despite the liberal construction to be given the disclosure provisions of the CPLR, "the scope of permissible discovery is not entirely unlimited and the trial court is invested with broad discretion to supervise discovery and to determine what is 'material and necessary’ as that phrase is used in CPLR 3101 (a)” (NBT Bancorp v Fleet/Norstar Fin. Group, 192 AD2d 1032, 1033; see, Blank v Schafrann, 180 AD2d 886, 887). Here, we are in full agreement with Supreme Court’s conclusion that the requested material was irrelevant and perceive no basis for disturbing its determination (see, supra).

Section 3101(a) requires disclosure of insurance policy provisions material and necessary to determine whether an insurer may bring a subrogation action.

St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance v. Bernstein Management Corp. · filed 1993-07-27(a)

Under the circumstances presented, the subrogation provision of the insurance policy may well be outcome determinative; accordingly, it is "material and necessary” to the preparation of defendants’ case. (CPLR 3101 [a].) It therefore must be disclosed.

Section 3101(a) does not require disclosure of pleadings from other lawsuits involving patients who fell at the defendant hospital when those pleadings are not material or necessary to the action.

Berman v. Huntington Hospital · filed 1994-02-28(a)

During disclosure, the plaintiff sought copies of pleadings in any lawsuit involving patients who fell at the defendant’s premises both prior to and subsequent to the instant accident. We conclude that such pleadings are not material or necessary in the prosecution of the ...action.

Section 3101(a) permits disclosure of insurance records concerning the fire loss at issue when they are material and necessary to the defense.

Roman Catholic Church of The Good Shepherd v. Tempco Systems · filed 1994-03-10(a)

Further, the requested items are discoverable as material and necessary to the defense of the underlying action (Sack v North Am. Sys., 115 AD2d 721).

Section 3101 permits temporally limited interrogatories that are material and necessary to prosecuting a case.

Malpass v. Makita Electric Works, Ltd. · filed 1994-03-14

The plaintiffs’ interrogatories, to the extent that they were upheld by the court and temporally limited in scope, are material and necessary to the prosecution of the plaintiffs’ case (see, CPLR 3101; Allen v Crowell-Collier Publ. Co., 21 NY2d 403, 406).

Section 3101 does not permit discovery of accident records involving the same escalator model at other locations when no design defect is alleged and the records are not material and necessary to the action.

Yoon v. F.W. Woolworth Co. · filed 1994-03-21

Thus, the records are not material and necessary to the prosecution or defense of this action and are not discoverable (see, CPLR 3101).

Section 3101(a) requires disclosure of photographs that are material and necessary to prosecuting a case.

Castillo v. New York City Transit Authority · filed 1994-04-11(a)

The materials which the plaintiffs seek are material and necessary to the prosecution of their case (see, CPLR 3101 [a]; Allen v Crowell-Collier Publ. Co., 21 NY2d 403).

Section 3101(a) limits disclosure to material and necessary information; a settlement agreement among plaintiffs is not discoverable when it bears no relation to the issues they must prove at trial.

Allegretti-Freeman v. Baltis · filed 1994-06-09(a)

We fail to see how the agreement conditioning settlement among the plaintiffs relates, even tangentially, to any material issue in the underlying causes of action for breach of contract and breach of warranty or relates to any issues that any party must prove at trial.

CPLR 3101 permits discovery of employment records relevant to the degree of a claimed employment-related disability.

Lohmann v. Trans World Airlines, Inc. · filed 1994-06-20

Since the plaintiff’s bill of particulars claims employment-related disability, evidence related to the degree of disability is material and necessary to the defense of the action (see, CPLR 3101; Johnson v National R. R. Passenger Corp., 83 AD2d 916).

CPLR 3101(a) permits a court to limit discovery demands and deny a request for a further deposition.

Albans v. City of New York · filed 1994-03-28(a)

We reject the plaintiffs’ contention that the court improperly limited discovery (see, CPLR 3101 [a]; 3120 [a] [1] [i]; Benzenberg v Telecom Plus, 119 AD2d 717).

Section 3101(a) calls for liberal disclosure of material and necessary information, but discovery demands must be reasonable.

Greater New York Mutual Insurance v. Lancer Insurance · filed 1994-04-25(a)

Although the phrase "material and necessary” is to be liberally construed, the test is one of "usefulness and reason” (CPLR 3101 [a]; Allen v Crowell-Collier Publ. Co., 21 NY2d 403).

Section 3101(a) permits broad disclosure of relevant information, including accident reports, photographs of changed conditions, and testimony about the accident scene.

Kaplan v. Einy · filed 1994-11-15(a)

As to the merits of plaintiff’s contentions and in view of the rule permitting broad disclosure (CPLR 3101 [a]; Sands v News Am. Publ., 161 AD2d 30) we conclude that plaintiff’s disclosure requests should have been granted.

Section 3101(a) calls for a liberal reading of “material and necessary” in favor of disclosure.

Cutrone v. Gaccione · filed 1994-12-12(a)

The settled law is that the phrase "material and necessary” should be interpreted liberally in favor of disclosure (see, Allen v Crowell-Collier Publ. Co., 21 NY2d 403; Zellman v Metropolitan Transp. Auth., 40 AD2d 248).

Section 3101(a) requires liberal disclosure of material that will assist trial preparation by sharpening the issues.

Titleserv, Inc. v. Zenobio · filed 1994-12-12(a)

CPLR 3101 is to be liberally construed to require disclosure when the matter sought to be disclosed will assist in trial preparation by sharpening the issues (see, Allen v Crowell-Collier Publ. Co., 21 NY2d 403, 406).

Section 3101(a) requires disclosure of material and necessary information, but a document request must be reasonably related to the issues in litigation and its likely usefulness.

Williams Real Estate Co. v. Viking Penguin, Inc. · filed 1995-06-06(a)

While CPLR 3101 (a) requires "full disclosure of all matter material and necessary in the prosecution or defense of an action”, the test is one of usefulness and reason, measured by whether the information sought is sufficiently related to the issues in litigation to make the effort to obtain it in preparation for trial reasonable (Allen v Crowell-Collier Publ. Co., 21 NY2d 403, 406-407). In this case, defendants’ request for various categories of other contracts is clearly overbroad in relation to the limited usefulness of the information for impeachment or cross examination purposes.

Section 3101(a) does not require disclosure of customer names and addresses that are not material and necessary to a divorce action.

Colley v. Colley · filed 1994-07-14(a)

In any event, we are of the view that the information sought by plaintiff is not "material and necessary” to the prosecution of this action for divorce (CPLR 3101 [a]; see generally, NBT Bancorp v Fleet/Norstar Fin. Group, 192 AD2d 1032, 1033; Matter of Du Bray, 132 AD2d 914, 915) and, therefore, Trust-co’s application for a protective order in this regard should have been granted.

Section 3101 creates a strong presumption in favor of disclosing relevant material when no undue harm warrants a restriction.

Napoleoni v. Union Hospital of the Bronx · filed 1994-09-01

No argument has been advanced that discovery should be restricted to avoid undue harm to plaintiff Carreras or any other person, and there is a strong presumption in favor of enforcing disclosure of relevant material (CPLR 3101; Cynthia B. v New Rochelle Hosp. Med. Ctr., 60 NY2d 452, 463; Allen v Crowell-Collier Publ. Co., 21 NY2d 403, 407).

Section 3101(a) permits disclosure when a deposition could lead to evidence material and necessary to prosecuting an action.

Mifsud v. City of New York · filed 1994-10-17(a)

Since the deposition of Retting could at the very least lead to the disclosure of evidence material and necessary to the prosecution of the action, the plaintiffs’ motion for an open commission pursuant to CPLR 3108 should have been granted (see, CPLR 3101 [a]; Stanzione v Consumer Bldrs., 149 AD2d 682; Wiseman v American Motors Sales Corp., 103 AD2d 230).

Section 3101(a) allows discovery of information material and necessary to prosecuting a cause of action.

G & F Copy Corp. v. Delson Business Systems, Inc. · filed 1994-11-28(a)

The information sought in the plaintiffs’ notice of discovery and inspection was material and necessary to the prosecution of their causes of action (see, CPLR 3101 [a]; Allen v Crowell-Collier Publ. Co., 21 NY2d 403).

Section 3101(a) requires disclosure of material necessary to prosecuting an action.

Whelton v. City of New York · filed 1995-05-22(a)

The items of the plaintiffs combined discovery demands at issue on this appeal are material and necessary to the prosecution of the action and, therefore, should be disclosed (see, CPLR 3101 [a]; Allen v Crowell-Collier Publ. Co., 21 NY2d 403).

Section 3101 does not permit discovery of other lessees’ identities when that information is not material and necessary to the defense of a breach of contract action.

Parimist Funding Corp. v. Rydzinski · filed 1995-05-30

Under these circumstances, the defendants’ attempt to discover the names of Parimist’s other lessees is not "evidence [which is] material and necessary in the * * * defense of [the] action” (CPLR 3101).

Section 3101(a) does not require disclosure of information that is no longer material and necessary to the litigation.

Xerox Corp. v. Duminuco · filed 1995-06-09(a)

The record reveals that respondents’ disclosure request sought information that is no longer material and necessary to the litigation (see, CPLR 3101 [a]).

Section 3101(a) does not require disclosure of confidential settlement terms when the requesting party shows no relevance to the underlying claims and seeks them for trial strategy.

Hulse v. A.B. Dick Co. · filed 1994-07-29(a)

Plaintiffs have persuaded the court that maintaining the confidentiality of the settlement agreements warrants the issuance of a protective order against IBM’s notice for discovery and inspection. Defendants failed successfully to oppose plaintiffs’ motion and to show the relevance of the discovery of the settlement agreements.

Section 3101(a) permits discovery of material and relevant information needed to prosecute a case.

Bowen v. New York City Housing Authority · filed 1994-12-12(a)

We further conclude that the plaintiffs’ discovery demands, as limited by the order appealed from, were material and relevant to the prosecution of their case (see, CPLR 3101 [a]; ... Allen v Crowell-Collier Publ. Co., 21 NY2d 403).

Section 3101(a) limits disclosure to material and necessary information and gives trial courts broad discretion to supervise discovery.

Jackson v. Dow Chemical Co. · filed 1995-04-13(a)

Turning to the issue of whether Supreme Court had the authority to vacate and modify certain items of plaintiff’s demand, we find that although the disclosure provisions of the CPLR are to be liberally construed, Supreme Court, because of its obvious familiarity with the matter, has broad discretion to supervise the discovery process and was in the best position to determine what is material and necessary.

Section 3101(a) requires disclosure of material and necessary information, including a bank’s procedures for crediting or declining to credit checks to a commercial account.

Clayton Funding Corp. v. State Bank of Long Island · filed 1995-10-10(a)

CPLR 3101 (a) provides that there shall be full disclosure of all matter "material and necessary” in the prosecution or defense of an action. ... The interrogatories at issue are relevant insofar as they inquire into the procedures the defendant follows in the crediting and non-crediting of a check to a commercial account.

CPLR 3101(a) permits discovery of board minutes and accreditation records that are not protected by statutory confidentiality.

Crea v. Newfane Inter-Community Memorial Hospital · filed 1996-02-02(a)

The court properly held that the information sought in demands 13 and 15 with respect to all minutes of defendant’s Board of Directors for the years 1990 to 1993 and for the files and documents relating to accreditation by the Joint Commission of Accreditation of Health Care Organizations’ Focus Survey for the years 1991, 1992 and 1993 are discoverable. The information in those demands is not protected by statutory confidentiality and is available to plaintiff under the broad rules of discovery (see, CPLR 3101 [a]; Allen v Crowell-Collier Publ. Co., 21 NY2d 403, 406-407).

Section 3101(a) does not require further depositions when they would not yield evidence relevant to the claims or defenses in the case.

Siesto v. Lenox Hill Hospital · filed 1996-03-12(a)

Therefore, any depositions of the parents would not lead to the disclosure of evidence relevant in this case.

Section 3101(a) requires disclosure of material and necessary evidence, including IRS determination letters relevant to alleged fiduciary misconduct.

In re the Estate of Carvel · filed 1996-04-12(a)

CPLR 3101 (a) directs full disclosure of all evidence material and necessary which will "assist preparation for trial by sharpening the issues and reducing delay and prolixity” (Allen v Crowell-Collier Publ. Co., 21 NY2d 403, 406-407). ... The court also considers the documents relevant to the underlying removal petition where specific acts of self-dealing and other fiduciary misconduct by Davis and Arcadipane as executors and trustees of Thomas Carvel’s estate are alleged.

CPLR 3101(a) limits disclosure of inmate files to portions that are material and necessary to the claim.

Holmes v. State · filed 1995-06-26(a)

Items 1 and 2 of the claimant’s notice of discovery and inspection, which requested the claimant’s and inmate Conrad Heron’s complete State prisoner files, should be limited to those portions of the files which are material and necessary (see, CPLR 3101 [a]) to the claim (e.g., exclusive of dental records, package room records, visitor and phone lists, clothing and personal property lists, work and classification records, educational and vocational records, etc.).

Section 3101(a) permits disclosure of unprivileged optometry records relevant to a party’s credibility, even when her eyesight is not in controversy.

Robinson v. Meca · filed 1995-10-26(a)

Where the material is not privileged, the question is whether the requested documents are "material and necessary” (CPLR 3101 [a]). CPLR 3101 (a) has been liberally interpreted and the "stress [is] on broad disclosure” (Sands v News Am. Publ., 161 AD2d 30, 36).

Section 3101(a) does not require disclosure of prior insurance policies with third parties when they are not material and necessary to the coverage dispute.

Washburn v. A.W. Lawrence & Co · filed 1995-12-14(a)

Here, we agree that defendant’s request for prior insurance policies plaintiff entered into with third parties so that it could allegedly determine what plaintiff’s intent on the issue of scope of coverage may not have been in the past is not "material and necessary” as that phrase is used in CPLR 3101 (a), and would not further the goals of " 'sharpening the issues and reducing delay and prolixity’ ” (NBT Bancorp v Fleet/ Norstar Fin. Group, 192 AD2d 1032, 1033, quoting Allen v Crowell-Collier Publ. Co., 21 NY2d 403, 406).

Section 3101(a) does not require disclosure of documents that are not material and necessary to the defense of the action.

Miller v. Kings Highway Hospital, Inc. · filed 1996-03-04(a)

Since the injured plaintiff’s main cause of action to recover damages for the loss of enjoyment of life relates to his inability to perform surgery rather than his inability to engage in recreational activities, the subpoenaed documents are not material and necessary to the defense of this action (see, CPLR 3101 [a]; Titleserv, Inc. v Zenobio, 210 AD2d 314).

Section 3101(a) allows disclosure of a landlord’s records of prior criminal activity when they are material to foreseeability and property safety in a negligence action.

Maldonado v. 69-70 Associates · filed 1996-03-08(a)

Memorandum: Supreme Court erred in denying plaintiffs’ motion to compel disclosure of defendant’s records relating to prior criminal activity at the apartment buildings owned and operated by defendant in Jackson Heights (see, CPLR 3101 [a]; Jacqueline S. v City of New York, 81 NY2d 288, 294, rearg denied 82 NY2d 749). ... The records that plaintiffs seek are necessary in the prosecution of this negligence action and are material to the issues of foreseeability and whether defendant maintained the property in a safe condition (see, Nallan v Helmsley-Spear, Inc., supra, at 519-520).

Section 3101(a) requires disclosure of title documents that are material and necessary to preparing a claim, even if they fall outside the insurance disclosure provision.

Blumenfrucht v. Davis · filed 1996-05-06(a)

Thus, even assuming arguendo that the discovery materials sought here do not fall within the ambit of subdivision (f) of this section, the title documents constitute matter that is "material and necessary” in the preparation of the plaintiff’s case and must be disclosed under subdivision (a) of CPLR 3101.

Section 3101(i) requires disclosure of all surveillance material in a party’s possession, including material the party does not intend to use at trial.

Simon v. Krueger International, Inc. · filed 1996-05-31(i)

CPLR 3101 (i) modified the rule set forth in DiMichel (supra), which required disclosure of only those tapes which defendant intended to use at trial. Defendant must now turn over all surveillance material in its possession.

Section 3101(a) requires liberal disclosure of material and necessary evidence, including the parts of a product alleged to be defective and the nature of the alleged defects.

Dijkstra v. Millar Elevator Industries, Inc. · filed 1996-06-10(a)

A party is entitled to "full disclosure of all evidence material and necessary in the prosecution or defense of an action” (CPLR 3101 [a]). The words "material” and "necessary” are to be liberally interpreted (Johantgen v Hobart Mfg. Co., 64 AD2d 858) and a defendant in a products liability action is entitled to know which parts of a product are claimed to be defective and the nature of the alleged defects (see, Wiseman v American Motors Sales Corp., 101 AD2d 859). Accordingly, Millar’s responses to interrogatories 8, 12 through 16, 25, 28 through 31, and 67 through 71, as propounded by Emerson, were insufficient.

Section 3101(a) requires full disclosure of matter material and necessary to prosecuting or defending an action, including information relevant to a party’s knowledge of alleged dangers.

Cilone v. Willson Safety Products, Inc. · filed 1996-07-01(a)

The Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in compelling the New York City Transit Authority to provide the disclosure demanded by the defendant-respondent, E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Co., and the defendant third-party plaintiff-respondent, Oatey Co. CPLR 3101 (a) provides that there shall be full disclosure of all matter "material and necessary” in the prosecution or defense of an action.

Section 3101(a) allows disclosure of material and necessary matters, subject to limits and the trial court’s discretion.

Silcox v. City of New York · filed 1996-11-25(a)

While it is true that CPLR 3101 (a) provides for "full disclosure of all matter material and necessary in the prosecution or defense of an action”, it is also true that unlimited disclosure is not permitted, and that the supervision of disclosure is generally left to the sound discretion of the trial court (see, City of Mount Vernon v Lexington Ins. Co., 232 AD2d 358; Kaplan v Herbstein, 175 AD2d 200).

Section 3101(a) requires disclosure of estimated and actual cost records when they may aid a party in defending a claim for the value of work performed.

JRDM Corp. v. U.W. Marx, Inc. · filed 1997-03-13(a)

For these reasons, we are constrained to find that Supreme Court erred in concluding that plaintiffs records of estimated and actual costs were not material and relevant.

Section 3101(a) covers requests for information material and necessary to prosecuting an action, even when the same discovery notice contains improper demands.

Ashley v. City of New York · filed 1997-06-02(a)

While the discovery notice included many improper demands, it also contained numerous appropriate requests for information material and necessary to the prosecution of this action (see, CPLR 3101 [a]).

Section 3101(a) does not require disclosure of a plaintiff’s billings to other clients when that information is not material and necessary to the defense.

Summit Rovins & Feldesman v. Fonar Corp. · filed 1996-06-13(a)

The IAS Court properly rejected defendant’s document demands since information concerning plaintiff’s billings to other clients is not material and necessary to the defense of the action (CPLR 3101 [a]).

Section 3101(a) requires disclosure of documents relevant to actual or constructive notice when they are material and necessary to prosecuting the action.

Cucci v. City of New York · filed 1996-11-25(a)

The documents sought by the plaintiffs in items one through six of their disclosure demands are relevant to the issue of actual or constructive notice on the part of the City of New York and thus are material and necessary to the prosecution of the plaintiffs’ case (see, CPLR 3101 [a]; Allen v CrowellCollier Publ. Co., 21 NY2d 403).

Section 3101 permits depositions of employees likely to possess information material and necessary to a liability claim when earlier depositions have not adequately supplied it.

Bennington v. Metal Container Corp. · filed 1996-12-16

Such information is "material and necessary” to the plaintiff’s prosecution of her case on liability (see, CPLR 3101), and, so far as the record reflects, has not been adequately supplied by the witnesses already deposed (see, e.g., Perez v City of White Plains, 222 AD2d 663; Barbara v Brunswick Hosp. Ctr., 172 AD2d 792; Matter of Rattner v Planning Commn., 110 AD2d 840; see also, JMJ Contract Mgt. v Ingersoll-Rand Co., 100 AD2d 291).

Section 3101(a) requires disclosure of financial records that are material and necessary to determine the extent of a plaintiff’s claimed business injury.

Gateway Theatrical of Bellport, Inc. v. Associated Musicians of Greater New York · filed 1997-06-16(a)

The court correctly directed the corporate plaintiffs to disclose their financial and ownership statements and the cash receipt journals for the years 1993,1994, and 1995. These documents are material and necessary (CPLR 3101 [a]) to a determination of the extent of the plaintiffs’ asserted injury to their business resulting from the allegedly libelous publications by the defendants (see, e.g., Kay v Kay, 223 AD2d 684; Titleserv, Inc. v Zenobio, 210 AD2d 314; Rubin v Alamo Rent-A-Car, 190 AD2d 661; Scholte v Agway, Inc., 152 AD2d 928; Miller Co. v Drew, 61 Misc 2d 638, 639-640).

Section 3101(a) permits disclosure of arguably relevant medical records for forensic tests that will not damage or destroy them.

Schioppa v. Pallotta · filed 1997-09-29(a)

Given the liberal interpretation of the rules of disclosure and the arguable relevance of the information sought to be discovered by the testing demanded, under the circumstances of this case, the Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in compelling the defendant to produce the subject medical records for any tests that will not result in damage to or the destruction of the records (see, Allen v Crowell-Collier Publ. Co., 21 NY2d 403, 406; Flower Cart v Fackovec, 163 AD2d 184; Petruk v South Ferry Realty Co., 2 AD2d 533; Booth, Lipton & Lipton v Cassel, 51 Misc 2d 853, affd 27 AD2d 706; CPLR 3101 [a]; 3120 [a] [2]; 6 Weinstein-Korn-Miller, NY Civ Prac 3120.18).

Section 3101(a) permits discovery beyond the immediate accident area when the evidence bears on the alleged defect and notice of it.

Santiago v. Pyramid Crossgates Co. · filed 1997-10-23(a)

Under the circumstances presented, the condition of the entire roof and prior instances of leaks throughout the entire mall are material to the inquiry of the defective design, construction and maintenance of the ceiling and roof, as well as to the question of notice of these conditions and the failure to correct them. We conclude that the discovery order is unduly restrictive.

CPLR 3101(a) permits discovery of information material and necessary to the issues in litigation.

Reynolds Metal Co. v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. · filed 1997-11-06(a)

In our view, information pertaining to off-site airborne fluoride emissions is neither “material” nor “necessary” (see, CPLR 3101 [a]; Allen v Crowell-Collier Publ. Co., supra) to the determination of defendants’ liability under the insurance contracts.

Section 3101(a) permits disclosure of evidence material and necessary to prosecute an action.

Kekis v. Park Slope Emergency Physician Service, P. C. · filed 1997-11-17(a)

Inasmuch as the disclosure sought by the plaintiff was “evidence material and necessary” for the prosecution of his action (CPLR 3101 [a]; see, Allen v CrowellCollier Publ. Co., 21 NY2d 403, 406, 407; Stanzione v Consumer Bldrs., 149 AD2d 682) and D’Allessio presently resides outside New York, the plaintiffs application to depose D’Allessio upon an open commission pursuant to CPLR 3108 was appropriate and should have been granted by the court (see, Stanzione v Consumer Bldrs., supra, at 682).

Section 3101 requires a party seeking to compel depositions to show that the proposed witnesses’ testimony is material and necessary to prosecuting the action.

Kopec v. City of New York · filed 1998-03-16

The plaintiffs have failed to demonstrate that depositions of the two proposed witnesses were material and necessary to the prosecution of the action (see, CPLR 3101; Allen v CrowellCollier Publ. Co., 21 NY2d 403).

Section 3101(a) permits compelled disclosure of information that is material and necessary to the prosecution or defense of an action.

In re the Estate of Othmer · filed 1998-05-04(a)

The Surrogate’s Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in compelling Wendell L. Quist, Mary D. Seina, Anthony Seina, Dr. Susan G. Scholer, and Naree Pankey to provide the disclosure demanded by the respondents Polytechnic University, Long Island College Hospital, the Chemical Heritage Foundation, the Board of Regents of the University of Nebraska, and the Omaha Public School District, as it is “material and necessary” in the prosecution or defense of this action (CPLR 3101 [a]; Cilone v Willson Safety Prods., 229 AD2d 372).

Section 3101 permits disclosure of records and testing likely to lead to admissible or relevant evidence.

Anderson v. Seigel · filed 1998-11-16

The authorizations sought in this case as to the academic records of the infant plaintiffs siblings and her mother, also a plaintiff here, the mother’s employment records, and the IQ testing of the infant plaintiffs mother, were likely to lead to the discovery of admissible or relevant evidence. Thus, the Supreme Court erred when it denied these requests (see, CPLR 3101; Davis v Elandem Realty Co., 226 AD2d 419; Wepy v Shen, 175 AD2d 124; Baldwin v Franklin Gen. Hosp., 151 AD2d 532; see also, Salkey v Mott, 237 AD2d 504).

Section 3101(a) permits discovery of material and necessary information beyond the specific procedures for physician examinations, subject to the trial court’s discretion.

Kavanagh v. Ogden Allied Maintenance Corp. · filed 1998-11-18(a)

The specific directives concerning the procedure for obtaining mental and physical examinations by a physician contained in CPLR 3121 (a) do not detract from a Trial Judge’s authority to act pursuant to the more general provisions which may render information discoverable (see, CPLR 3101 [a]) and obtainable (see, CPLR 3102 [a]).

Section 3101(a) requires disclosure of a party eyewitness’s testimony when it is material and relevant to the action.

Willis v. Cassia · filed 1998-11-19(a)

Although it is not disputed that Cassia suffered trauma as a result of the accident, it cannot be ignored that Cassia, now an adult, is a party and eyewitness to the accident and her testimony is obviously material and relevant (cf., Arroyo v Fourteen Estusia Corp., 194 AD2d 309).

Section 3101(a) allows disclosure of relevant material when the court grants leave and no competing interest outweighs the need for it.

Town of Pleasant Valley v. New York State Board of Real Property Services · filed 1999-01-19(a)

In the absence of such contravening interests, any discovery that is relevant to the controversy at issue qualifies as material and necessary and should be allowed (see, 860 Executive Towers v Board of Assessors, supra).

Section 3101(a) requires disclosure of material that could be useful in preparing for trial, subject to privileges and limits on disclosure of private documents.

In re the Estate of Freilich · filed 1999-02-22(a)

The petitioner’s request for disclosure is viewed in light of the direction in Allen v Crowell-Collier Publ. Co. (21 NY2d 403, 406-407), to liberally construe the words “material and necessary” in CPLR 3101 (a) so that disclosure is required where it can reasonably be concluded that the requested material would be useful in preparing for trial because it might conceivably be used as evidence in chief or rebuttal. Nevertheless, this liberal approach to disclosure neither abrogates recognized privileges nor requires the routine production of documents that are ordinarily considered confidential and private in nature.

CPLR 3101(a) does not require disclosure of information that is not material and necessary to the prosecution of a claim.

Palma v. Iona College · filed 1999-03-08(a)

This information is not “material and necessary” to the prosecution of the plaintiffs breach of employment contract claim, which is premised on the theory that the college violated the provisions of the faculty handbook by terminating him without “sufficient cause” (see, CPLR 3101 [a]; Allen v Crowell-Collier Publ. Co., 21 NY2d 403, 406).

Section 3101 requires a party seeking additional discovery to show that it is material and necessary to the prosecution of the case.

Casolaro v. New York Central Mutual Fire Insurance · filed 1999-03-22

In light of the plaintiffs’ failure to demonstrate that the additional discovery which they sought was material and necessary to the prosecution of its case (see, CPLR 3101; Allen v Crowell-Collier Publ. Co., 21 NY2d 403), the Supreme Court properly denied their motion to vacate the trial readiness order and to compel additional discovery.

Section 3101(a) permits disclosure of corporate financial records that may lead to admissible proof of claimed shareholder rights, without first requiring the claimant to establish those rights.

Chaudhry v. Abadir · filed 1999-05-17(a)

We reject the defendants’ contention that in order to demonstrate their entitlement to disclosure of corporate documents in preparation for trial of their claims that they had shareholder rights in the subject corporation, the plaintiffs were required to establish their rights in the corporation. The documents which the defendants have been directed to produce are “material and necessary” for the prosecution of this action (see, CPLR 3101 [a]) in that they may lead the plaintiffs to admissible proof of their alleged rights in the corporation (see, LoVerde v Interex Design & Equip. Corp., 54 AD2d 1090; see also, Matter of Koch v Specto Opt., 184 AD2d 701, 704; see generally, Twenty Four Hour Fuel Oil Corp. v Hunter Ambulance, 226 AD2d 175).

Section 3101(a) does not permit inquiry into nonparty siblings’ developmental and academic histories when the requesting party has not established their relevance to a claim or defense.

Monica W. v. Milevoi · filed 1999-02-18(a)

However, defendants’ discovery demand is overbroad, and the relevance of the requested information to any claim or defense in the action has not been established (Bycomp, Inc. v New York Racing Assn., 126 AD2d 815).

Section 3101(a)(1) requires a threshold showing that requested discovery is relevant; documents about other vehicle models require sufficient proof that the models are similar to the vehicle at issue.

Cirineo v. Pepsi Cola Bottling Co. · filed 1999-04-05(a)(1)

The plaintiff failed to make some threshold showing of relevance between the vehicle models FCG15N5 and FCG20N5 for which items of discovery were sought and the vehicle identified as having been involved in the.accident (see, Fine v Facet Aerospace Prods., 133 FRD 439, 442; Breslauer v Dan, 150 AD2d 324, 325). Moreover, the record contains insufficient proof that vehicle models FCG15N5 and FCG20N5 are sufficiently similar in design to the vehicle claimed to be defective so as to sustain the disclosure sought by the plaintiff (see, Breslauer v Dan, supra; Mestman v Ariens Co., 135 AD2d 516, 517).

Section 3101 permits discovery of material that may be used as evidence-in-chief or for rebuttal or impeachment.

Bryant v. Bui · filed 1999-10-01

Any material that may be used as evidence-in-chief or for rebuttal or impeachment is discoverable (see, CPLR 3101; Allen v CrowellCollier Publ. Co., 21 NY2d 403, 407).

Section 3101(a) permits discovery relevant to class certification, including information about other securities when the record does not establish that they were valued differently.

Casey v. Prudential Securities, Inc. · filed 2000-01-20(a)

Also, relevant to this action is the broad disclosure standard articulated in CPLR 3101 (a) encompassing “all matter material and necessary in the prosecution or defense of an action”, balanced by the court’s ability to issue a protective order to prevent abuse (see, CPLR 3103 [a]). ... In the absence of adequate support for the contention that the method and accuracy of valuation between unlisted common stocks and unlisted preferred stock is substantially different, there is no basis for us to disturb Supreme Court’s exercise of discretion regarding this discovery request.

Section 3101 requires disclosure of a plaintiff’s prior medical conditions and accident when they are material and necessary to the defense.

Schecter v. 210 E. 90th St. Owners, Inc. · filed 2000-04-04

Further, as plaintiff has averred that her epileptic condition may have contributed to the subject accident, disclosure of her epileptic condition, as well as her prior accident, is material and necessary to a defense of this action (CPLR 3101; Allen v Crowell-Collier Publ. Co., 21 NY2d 403).

CPLR 3101 requires a threshold showing of relevance before a party can obtain disclosure about other vehicle models.

Young v. Tierney · filed 2000-04-17

The disclosure available pursuant to CPLR 3101 generally is left to the sound discretion of the trial court (see, Silcox v City of New York, 233 AD2d 494). The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying the plaintiffs’ request for information concerning Navistar International Transportation Corporation’s design and use of bumper plates and smooth flanges on certain vehicle models. The plaintiffs failed to make a threshold showing of relevance between the vehicle models for which discovery was sought and the vehicle identified as having been involved in the accident (see, Cirineo v Pepsi Cola Bottling Co., 260 AD2d 341).

CPLR 3101(a) permits disclosure of documents relevant to the claims, including documents concerning areas above the World Trade Center’s subgrade areas in this litigation.

Steering Committee v. Port Authority of New York & New Jersey · filed 1999-07-29(a)

All of these refer to areas above the subgrade areas of the World Trade Center, which is the basis of Port Authority’s argument that they are irrelevant to plaintiffs’ claims. Port Authority has presented no reason to alter our prior holding that these documents are relevant under CPLR 3101 (a).

Section 3101 permits in camera review of requested records when the requesting party makes a sufficient factual showing of their materiality and relevance.

Mastroianni v. County of Suffolk · filed 1999-09-22

These facts, coupled with the review of the 911 tapes, the interview with the Internal Affairs officer and the depositions lead the court to conclude that there is sufficient factual predicate showing of materiality and relevancy in the materials sought to warrant the court’s in camera review (see, People v Gissendanner, 48 NY2d 543 [1979]; Zarn v City of New York, 198 AD2d 220 [1993]; see also, Matter of Farbman & Sons v New York City Health & Hosps. Corp., 62 NY2d 75, supra; Cornell Univ. v City of N. Y. Police Dept., 153 AD2d 515, supra; CPLR 3101).

Section 3101(a) does not require disclosure of banking information that is neither material nor relevant to the issues in the action.

In re the Estate of Matthews · filed 1999-11-08(a)

Here, however, the banking information concerning the appellant’s accounts at the petitioner trustee Bank of New York is neither material nor relevant to the determination of whether the trustees behaved improperly in distributing the trust funds.

Section 3101(a) permits disclosure of travel and lodging records relevant to a disputed claim of disability.

Besicorp Group, Inc. v. Enowitz · filed 2000-01-20(a)

In our view, defendant’s records of out-of-town travel and related lodging in the six months preceding his August 17, 1994 resignation are relevant to the issue of his permanent disability on or about that date (see, CPLR 3101 [a]; McEnaney v State of New York, 242 AD2d 851, 852).

Section 3101(a) permits disclosure of specified bank account information and employment records when they are material and necessary to the defense.

Dore v. Allstate Indemnity Co. · filed 1999-09-27(a)

The demand for specified bank account information and employment records was proper as it was material and necessary to the defense of the action (see, CPLR 3101 [a]; Allen v Crowell-Collier Publ. Co., 21 NY2d 403, 406; Conway v Bayley Seton Hosp., 104 AD2d 1018, 1019; Anderson v Seigel, 255 AD2d 409).

Section 3101(a) does not require disclosure of material irrelevant and immaterial to a claim.

Gaudino v. City of New York · filed 1999-10-04(a)

Accordingly, the contents of ELRAC’s application for a certificate of self-insurance are irrelevant and immaterial to the indemnification claim, and the appellant is not entitled to their disclosure pursuant to CPLR 3101 (a) or to include demands for them in the notice to admit served on ELRAC.