Montalvo v. CVS Pharmacy, Inc.Montalvo v. CVS Pharmacy, Inc.
Ordered that the resettled order is affirmed, with costs.
Here, the plaintiffs’ discovery demands at issue were palpably improper in that they sought, inter alia, irrelevant information, or were overbroad and burdensome. Accordingly, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in granting the motion of the defendant CVS Pharmacy, Inc., for a protective order with respect to the subject discovery demands (see Gilman & Ciocia, Inc. v Walsh, 45 AD3d at 531; Astudillo v St. Francis-Beacon Extended Care Facility, Inc., 12 AD3d 469, 470 [2004]).
Rivera, J.P., Leventhal, Hall and Roman, JJ., concur.