Ordered that the order is reversed, on the facts and as a matter of discretion, with costs, the application is denied, and the proceeding is dismissed.
The Supreme Court improvidently exercised its discretion in granting the petitioner's application for pre-action disclosure because, inter alia, the discovery requested was not limited to obtaining the identities of prospective defendants, and the petitioner had sufficient information to frame a complaint without the discovery requested ( see CPLR 3102 [c]; Matter of Toal v. Staten Is. Univ. Hosp., 300 AD2d 592; Matter of Stewart v. New York City Tr. Auth., 112 AD2d 939, 940; Matter of Corigliano, 76 AD2d 886; Matter of Houlihan-Parnes, Realtors [Cantor, Fitzgerald Co.], 58 AD2d 629, 630; Patterns Unlimited v. Weiss, 36 AD2d 859). Moreover, the petitioner did not demonstrate the need to preserve the items requested in the application ( cf. Matter of Stanco v. Steinberg, 254 AD2d 363).