
    In the Matter of Donna Miller, Also Known as Donna Pauline Miller, and Another, Deceased. JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A., Respondent; David Miller, Appellant.
    [17 NYS3d 656]
   In a probate proceeding in which the executor of the estate, JP Morgan Chase & Co., petitioned to judicially settle its account, the objectant David Miller appeals from an order of the Surrogate’s Court, Suffolk County (Czygier, S.), entered June 26, 2013, which denied the objectants’ motion to compel further discovery and to impose sanctions against the executor.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs payable personally by the appellant.

The Surrogate’s Court providently exercised its discretion in denying that branch of the objectants’ motion which was to compel the executor to comply with certain discovery requests, as the numerous discovery requests were vague, overbroad, burdensome, or not reasonably calculated to lead to material or necessary information (see Accent Collections, Inc. v Cappelli Enters., Inc., 84 AD3d 1283 [2011]; Palermo Mason Constr. v Aark Holding Corp., 300 AD2d 460, 461 [2002]). In addition, many of the requests were duplicative of prior interrogatories and discovery demands to which the executor had already responded.

Since the executor did not fail to comply with a proper discovery request, the Supreme Court properly declined to impose sanctions.

Mastro, J.P., Balkin, Sgroi and Maltese, JJ., concur.  