AABCO Sheet Metal Co. v. Lincoln Center for Performing Arts, Inc.

249 A.D.2d 39, 670 N.Y.S.2d 494, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3788
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedApril 7, 1998
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 249 A.D.2d 39 (AABCO Sheet Metal Co. v. Lincoln Center for Performing Arts, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
AABCO Sheet Metal Co. v. Lincoln Center for Performing Arts, Inc., 249 A.D.2d 39, 670 N.Y.S.2d 494, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3788 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Paula Oman-sky, J.), entered August 14, 1997, which, inter alia, denied defendant-appellant judgment debtor’s motion to quash a CPLR 5224 subpoena served upon him by plaintiff judgment creditor, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

The motion to quash was properly denied notwithstanding that judgment debtor, an out-of-State resident, was served with the subpoena while in New York solely to attend trial in an unrelated action (DuPont v Bronston, 46 AD2d 369, 372-373 [Steuer, J., dissenting]). Unlike the subpoena in DuPont, which was served on the judgment debtor while attending a Federal court proceeding, here the subpoena was served in a State court, and thus considerations of comity do not constrain careful avoidance of any possible interference with the authority and dignity of another court (supra, at 372 [majority opn]; cf., Lamb v Schmitt, 285 US 222, 225; Netograph Mfg. Co. v Scrugham, 197 NY 377, 380). To the extent DuPont can be [40]*40read to hold that, apart from reasons of comity, a CPLR 5224 subpoena may not be served on a judgment debtor while voluntarily attending court in an unrelated proceeding, it is overruled. We have considered judgment debtor’s other arguments and find them to be without merit. Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Williams, Tom and Andrias, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Armor Bay Constr. Corp. v. Richmond Constr. Inc.
2024 NY Slip Op 50429(U) (New York Supreme Court, Richmond County, 2024)
Genger v. Genger
50 Misc. 3d 361 (New York Supreme Court, 2015)
Bartwitz v. Hotaling
184 Misc. 2d 515 (New York Supreme Court, 2000)
Atherton v. Brooks
728 A.2d 1195 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 1999)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
249 A.D.2d 39, 670 N.Y.S.2d 494, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3788, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/aabco-sheet-metal-co-v-lincoln-center-for-performing-arts-inc-nyappdiv-1998.