Legal Opinion

Senior v. Manufacturers Hanover Trust Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided April 22, 1985PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Special Term properly vacated the discovery demands as overbroad. Assuming, arguendo, that some of the interrogatories were proper, many more, such as numbers 1-6, which seek the identities of every sponsor of, participant in and beneficiary of both the Master IRA and Master Keogh plans offered by defendants from 1979 to 1983 are clearly unreasonable and irrelevant. “The burden of serving a proper demand is upon counsel and [it is] not for the courts to correct a palpably bad one” (Itzkoff v Allstate Ins. Co., 59 AD2d 854, 855; Roberts v Modica, 92 AD2d 563; Martino v Mid-Island Hosp., 73…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Walker v. SheldonNew York Court of Appeals · 1961
  2. Borkowski v. BorkowskiNew York Court of Appeals · 1976
  3. Holoness Realty Corp. v. New York Property Insurance Underwriting Ass'nAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1980
  4. Marcus v. MarcusAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1983
  5. Gale v. KesslerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1983

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Dempski v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1998
  2. Bouton v. County of SuffolkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1986

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API