Chinatown Preserv. HDFC v Yu Hua Chen, 2010 NY Slip Op 50730(U) [27 Misc 3d 1213(A)]

that are "material and necessary" and which concern "any facts bearing on the controversy which
will assist preparation for trial by sharpening the issues and reducing delay and prolixity" shall
be granted. (Id.)

Respondent Chen's disclosure requests seek information concerning the vacancy lease
improvements, excessive first rent after rent control, key money, and broker fees. (Affirmation of
Fernandez, Dec. 30, 2009, ¶13-14.) These requests, only pertinent to respondent's
counterclaims for overcharge, are now academic and thus denied.

Respondent Chen seeks "any deed, together with any document showing relationship"
between the petitioner and his predecessors in interest, the Asian-American Housing
Development Fund Company (AHDFC) and Nancy Mak. (Affirmation of Fernandez, Dec. 30,
2009, ¶15.) Deeds are public records. Accordingly, respondent Chen's request for the deed
is denied because it is available to her. Further, the deed is attached as Exhibit A in petitioner's
cross-motion. Respondent Chen also requests any contracts or correspondence "related to any
indemnification of any condition at subject premises" between petitioner and the prior owner to
determine whether petitioner was aware of the condition of the subject premises when petitioner
obtained title. (Affirmation of Fernandez, Feb. 8, 2010, � 6-7.) Respondent Chen is not entitled
to any alleged indemnification agreements between petitioner and the prior owner.

Respondent Chen also requests any videotape and pictures taken by petitioner when the
DOB came to premises on June 25, 2009. (Affirmation of Fernandez, Dec. 30, 2009, ¶16.)
Respondent argues that his request is critical to his defense that petitioner "knew or should have