Author DMG Posted on MaMaCategories CPLR R. As such, they were too speculative to warrant disclosure of plaintiff’s cell phone records ( see Gough v Panorama Windows, Ltd., 133 AD3d 526 ).
The affidavits submitted in support of the motion simply stated that plaintiff was holding his cell phone in his hand prior to the trip and fall accident, and that the cell phone was found near his body after the accident. Defendants at this point have failed to satisfy the “threshold requirement” that the request was reasonably calculated to yield information that is “material and necessary” ( Forman v Henkin, 30 NY3d 656, 661 ). Partners, LLC v Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP, 52 AD3d 370, 373 ). The court providently exercised its discretion in denying defendants’ motion ( see generally Veras Inv.