Legal Opinion
Blumenthal v. Tops Friendly Markets
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided April 24, 1992PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Order unanimously affirmed with costs. *1106Memorandum: Supreme Court is vested with broad discretion in supervising disclosure (see, Matter of Love Canal Actions, 161 AD2d 1169, 1170; Sarbro Realty Corp. v Kradjian, 116 AD2d 866, 867). We conclude that the court did not abuse its discretion in denying plaintiffs request for discovery of information relating to other Tops employees. (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Affronti, J. — Discovery.) Present — Callahan, J. P., Boomer, Lawton, Boehm and Davis, JJ.
2Cases cited2 opinions
- In re Love Canal ActionsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990
- Sarbro Realty Corp. v. KradjianAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1986
3Cited by6 opinions
- Schlau v. City of BuffaloAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2015
- Hardy v. Tops Markets, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1996
- ABR-Amtliches Bayerisches Reisebuero GmbH v. Blue Bird Coach Lines, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1998
- Krapf Business Systems, Inc. v. Data Control, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994
- SCHLAU, JR., KENNETH M. v. CITY OF BUFFALOAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2015
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.