Gordon v. 580 Equities, Inc.
Opinion of the Court
This is an application by the defendant for a discovery and inspection of certain items of personal property alleged to have been damaged by water through the negligence of the defendant. The power to compel a discovery is very broad and rests upon the sound discretion of the court “ as justice requires”. (Rules Civ. Prac., rule 141.) The subject matter may include any article or property relating to the merits of the action, or of the defense therein. (Civ. Prac. Act, § 324.) Prior to the enactment of section 324 of the Civil Practice Act, discovery was limited to books, documents and other papers. (See Code Civ. Pro., § 803.) The contention of the plaintiff that the amount of damages has no relation to the merits of the defense is untenable. It is part of the defendant’s defense to refute the damages claimed by the plaintiff. Such defense need not necessarily be an affirmative one. (See Iroquois Hotel & Apt. Co. v. Iroquois Realty Co., 126 App. Div. 814; Miller v. New England Mut. Life Ins. Co., 14 N. Y. S.’ 2d, 129.) Certainly if a party is required to submit his person for physical examination pursuant to section 306 of the Civil Practice Act, then what sanctity does an inanimate object possess so as to preclude an inspection. The modern trend is to encourage inspections and to afford the statutes a liberal construction. In
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.