## Facts

- E.L., a minor, attended a private high school.
- Petitioners alleged that an unidentified individual widely disseminated an intimate photograph depicting an unclothed portion of E.L.’s body to students and faculty and identified E.L. as the subject.
- The conduct was alleged to lack any legitimate purpose and to have been undertaken to cause severe emotional distress and to incite school discipline.
- E.L. allegedly suffered severe emotional distress, and the school allegedly threatened expulsion after receiving the photograph and identifying information.
- E.L. withdrew to avoid expulsion.
- Petitioners alleged the photograph and identifying information continued to circulate at E.L.’s subsequent schools and in the broader community.
- Petitioners commenced a CPLR 3102(c) special proceeding seeking limited pre-action disclosure of the names of the individuals who provided the photograph to the school and who identified E.L. in it.
- The trial court ordered the school to disclose those names, and the school appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether petitioners satisfied CPLR 3102(c) by showing a potentially meritorious, cognizable cause of action against unidentified individuals.
2. Whether the requested disclosure was material and necessary to identify potential defendants and frame a complaint, rather than an impermissible fishing expedition.

## Decision

- The appellate court affirmed the order insofar as appealed from.
- The court held that the petition alleged sufficient facts to support a cognizable potential claim against the unidentified individual(s), including intentional infliction of emotional distress-type wrongdoing.
- The court held the disclosure request was narrowly tailored to identifying the persons who provided the photograph and attributed it to E.L., making it material and necessary to bring an action.
- The court concluded the trial court did not abuse its discretion in granting limited pre-action disclosure.

## Legal Principles

- CPLR 3102(c) authorizes pre-action disclosure to aid in bringing an action, including identifying potential defendants, not solely to preserve evidence.
- A petitioner must show a potentially meritorious cause of action supported by specific factual allegations; speculative or conclusory assertions are insufficient.
- Pre-action disclosure must be narrowly confined to information material and necessary to frame the complaint or identify defendants and may not be used for open-ended investigation.

## Conclusion

The court permitted limited pre-action discovery under CPLR 3102(c) because the petition alleged specific, harmful dissemination of an intimate photograph and sought only identifying information necessary to name responsible individuals and commence a targeted civil action.


Leff v. Our Lady of Mercy Acad., 150 A.D.3d 1239 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep’t 2017)