## Facts

- Kelly Forman sued Mark Henkin for injuries allegedly suffered when she fell from Henkin’s horse, claiming spinal and traumatic brain injuries and resulting cognitive and social impairments.
- Forman alleged significant limits on activities and abilities, including difficulties writing, communicating, and using a computer, and asserted she had become reclusive.
- Before the accident, Forman maintained a Facebook account and posted many photographs reflecting an active lifestyle; she later deactivated the account and could not recall whether post-accident photos were posted.
- Henkin sought an unlimited authorization for Forman’s entire private Facebook content, arguing photos and writings were material and necessary to test her injury claims and credibility.
- Forman opposed, arguing the public portion did not contradict her claims and did not justify access to private content.
- The trial court ordered limited disclosure: (a) pre-accident photos of Forman she intended to use at trial and (b) post-accident photos, excluding those depicting nudity or romantic encounters.
- The Appellate Division narrowed disclosure to photos Forman intended to introduce at trial, effectively requiring a threshold showing from public posts that private content contradicted her claims.

## Issues

1. Under CPLR 3101(a), must a party seeking nonpublic social-media content first show—based on public postings—that the private content contradicts the account holder’s claims?
2. What standard governs discovery of private social-media materials, and how should courts tailor such discovery to relevant information?

## Decision

- The Court of Appeals reversed the Appellate Division and reinstated the trial court’s discovery order.
- The court rejected a heightened, social-media-specific threshold tied to whether public content contradicted a party’s claims.
- The court held the governing inquiry is whether the requested material is “material and necessary” and reasonably calculated to contain relevant information, not whether it is designated “private.”
- The court approved tailored disclosure limited to categories likely to bear on the alleged injuries, functional limitations, and credibility, rather than granting unfettered access to the full account.

## Legal Principles

- CPLR 3101(a) requires broad disclosure of matter “material and necessary” to the prosecution or defense; discovery may reach information reasonably calculated to contain relevant evidence, even if not itself admissible.
- Social-media content is subject to the same disclosure rules as other information; privacy settings do not create a privilege or immunity from otherwise proper discovery.
- Courts should reject rules that condition discovery of private social-media content on a preliminary showing that public postings undermine the claims at issue.
- Discovery must still be appropriately limited in scope and tailored to relevant categories and time frames, and courts may exclude clearly personal or irrelevant material to avoid overbreadth and undue intrusion.

## Conclusion

The New York Court of Appeals held that nonpublic social-media materials are discoverable under ordinary CPLR 3101(a) relevance standards without a special “public contradiction” prerequisite, while emphasizing that courts must issue tailored orders that target content reasonably calculated to contain relevant information and avoid unrestricted access.


Forman v. Henkin, 30 N.Y.3d 656 (N.Y. 2018)