SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

970 

CA 11-02294 

PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., CENTRA, CARNI, SCONIERS, AND MARTOCHE, JJ. 

 

CHARLOTTE KREGG, AS GUARDIAN OF CHRISTOPHER M. 

WILLIAMS, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, 

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

EILEEN MALDONADO, ET AL., DEFENDANTS, 

AMERICAN SUZUKI MOTOR CORPORATION AND SUZUKI

MOTOR CORPORATION OF JAPAN, 

DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS. 

 

LIPSITZ GREEN SCIME CAMBRIA LLP, BUFFALO (JOHN A. COLLINS OF COUNSEL),

FOR PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT. 

WEBSTER SZANYI LLP, BUFFALO (THOMAS S. LANE OF COUNSEL), FOR

DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS. 

 

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Erie County (John L.

Michalski, A.J.), entered August 5, 2011. The order, insofar as

appealed from, granted that part of the motion of defendants American

Suzuki Motor Corporation and Suzuki Motor Corporation of Japan seeking 

to compel plaintiff to disclose computer records regarding the use of

social media. 

It is hereby ORDERED that the order insofar as appealed from is

unanimously reversed on the law without costs and that part of the

motion seeking disclosure of all social media account records

maintained by or on behalf of Christopher M. Williams is denied in

accordance with the following Memorandum: Plaintiff, as limited by

her brief, appeals from an order insofar as it granted that part of

the motion of defendants Suzuki Motor Corporation of Japan and

American Suzuki Motor Corporation (collectively, Suzuki defendants) to

compel the disclosure of all social media account records concerning

plaintiff’s son (hereafter, injured party), who was involved in a

motor vehicle accident while driving a motorcycle manufactured and

distributed by the Suzuki defendants. After initial disclosure

exchanges, the Suzuki defendants learned that family members of the

injured party had established Facebook and MySpace accounts for him

and had made Internet postings on his behalf in connection with those

accounts. The Suzuki defendants moved, inter alia, to compel the

disclosure of the “entire contents” of those and any other social

media accounts maintained by or on behalf of the injured party. 

Plaintiff objected to such disclosure on the grounds of relevance and

burden, contending that the demand for disclosure was a “fishing

expedition.” Supreme Court agreed with the Suzuki defendants that
-2- 970 

CA 11-02294 

they were entitled to such disclosure. That was error.

Although CPLR 3101 (a) provides for “full disclosure of all

matter material and necessary in the prosecution or defense of an

action,” it is well settled that a party need not respond to discovery

demands that are overbroad (see Optic Plus Enters., Ltd. v Bausch &

Lomb Inc., 35 AD3d 1263, 1263). Where discovery demands are

overbroad, “ ‘the appropriate remedy is to vacate the entire demand

rather than to prune it’ ” (Board of Mgrs. of the Park Regent

Condominium v Park Regent Assoc., 78 AD3d 752, 753). In McCann v

Harleysville Ins. Co. of N.Y. (78 AD3d 1524, 1525), we addressed a

similar discovery demand and concluded that the request for access to

social media sites was made without “a factual predicate with respect

to the relevancy of the evidence” (see Crazytown Furniture v Brooklyn

Union Gas Co., 150 AD2d 420, 421). Here, as in McMann, there is no

contention that the information in the social media accounts

contradicts plaintiff’s claims for the diminution of the injured

party’s enjoyment of life (cf. Romano v Steelcase, Inc., 30 Misc 3d

426, 427). As in McCann, the proper means by which to obtain

disclosure of any relevant information contained in the social media

accounts is a narrowly-tailored discovery request seeking only that

social-media-based information that relates to the claimed injuries

arising from the accident. Thus, we deny that part of the Suzuki

defendants’ motion to compel the disclosure of the entire contents of

the injured party’s social media accounts, without prejudice to the

service of a more narrowly-tailored disclosure request.

Entered: September 28, 2012 Frances E. Cafarell

Clerk of the Court