Case Name: ABR-Amtliches Bayerisches Reisebuero GmbH, Respondent, v. Blue Bird Coach Lines, Inc., et al., Appellants
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1998-04-29
Citations: 249 A.D.2d 983
Docket Number: 
Parties: ABR-Amtliches Bayerisches Reisebuero GmbH, Respondent, v Blue Bird Coach Lines, Inc., et al., Appellants.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 249
Pages: 983–984

Head Matter:
ABR-Amtliches Bayerisches Reisebuero GmbH, Respondent, v Blue Bird Coach Lines, Inc., et al., Appellants.
[671 NYS2d 383]

Opinion:
—Order unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court did not abuse its discretion in grant ing a conditional order of protection (see, Nama Air Cargo Co. v Unitrans Consol., 208 AD2d 604, 605; see also, Oneto v Hotel Waldorf-Astoria Corp., 65 AD2d 520, 521). The IAS Court is vested with broad discretion in supervising disclosure (see, Blumenthal v Tops Friendly Mkts., 182 AD2d 1105, 1106; Matter of Love Canal Actions, 161 AD2d 1169, 1170). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Whelan, J. — Discovery.) Present — Denman, P. J., Green, Pigott, Jr., Callahan and Fallon, JJ.