KIMMEL v. PAUL, WEISS, RIFKIND, WHARTON & GARRISON


214 A.D.2d 453 (1995)

625 N.Y.S.2d 202

Sidney Kimmel et al., Appellants, v. Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison, Respondent

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Department.

April 20, 1995


Since the Notice to Admit predominantly seeks admissions as to material and ultimate issues, and legal conclusions on material issues, as opposed to admissions confirming matters where "there can be no substantial dispute at the trial" (CPLR 3123 [a]), the Notice to Admit was properly stricken. (See, e.g., Hodes v City of New York, 165 A.D.2d 168.) As to the interrogatories at issue, it is clear that they improperly request information which is mainly duplicative of information already obtained through earlier discovery (see, e.g., Comstock & Co. v City of New York, 80 A.D.2d 805). Finally, we note that while a few proper requests may be interspersed in the Notice to Admit and amongst the largely redundant interrogatories, it is not the court's obligation to prune those pre-litigation devices (see, e.g., Berg v Flower Fifth Ave. Hosp., 102 A.D.2d 760; Lewis v Hertz Corp., 193 A.D.2d 470).


Comment

1000 Characters Remaining

Leagle.com reserves the right to edit or remove comments but is under no obligation to do so, or to explain individual moderation decisions.

User Comments

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases