KIM v. BAE

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying the defendants' motion to quash, inasmuch as the plaintiffs have established that they possess a good faith basis for seeking to depose the defendants' attorney, and that the information sought is both relevant and necessary (see, Frybergh v Kouffman, 119 A.D.2d 541; see also, SPA Realty Assocs. v Springs Assocs., 155 A.D.2d 839; McNulty v McNulty, 81 A.D.2d 581; Planned Indus. Ctrs. v Eric Bldrs., 51 A.D.2d 586; Glen 4912 Corp. v Strauss, 44 A.D.2d 582). Thompson, J.P., Sullivan, Ritter and Joy, JJ., concur.