Anonymous No. 7 v. Arkwright

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Anonymous No. 7 v. Arkwright

6 A.D.2d 719

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedMay 26, 1958

StatusPublished

This text of 6 A.D.2d 719 (Anonymous No. 7 v. Arkwright) 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

Anonymous No. 7 v. Arkwright, 6 A.D.2d 719 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1958).

Pincite

Opinion

Proceeding to review a determination adjudging petitioner, a licensed private detective and investigator, guilty of a criminal contempt for refusing to answer questions at a judicial inquiry, and imposing punishment. Refusal to answer was on the sole ground that petitioner’s attorney was not permitted to be present in the hearing room during the interrogation. Petitioner contends that special facts distinguish this proceeding from Matter of Anonymous v. Arkwright (5 A D 2d 790) and Matter of Anonymous v. Arkwright (5 A D 2d 792, motion for leave to appeal denied in both proceedings 4 N Y. 2d 676) in that petitioner, prior to being called to testify, was informed that he was being called not merely as a witness but that he was being investigated and that sufficient evidence was already available to warrant presentation thereof to a Grand Jury or District Attorney. Determination unanimously confirmed, without costs. No opinion. Present — Nolan, P. J., Wenzel, Beldock, Ughetta and Hallinan, JJ.

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

Proceeding to review a determination adjudging petitioner, a licensed private detective and investigator, guilty of a criminal contempt for refusing to answer questions at a judicial inquiry, and imposing punishment. Refusal to answer was on the sole ground that petitioner’s attorney was not permitted to be present in the hearing room during the interrogation. Petitioner contends that special facts distinguish this proceeding from Matter of Anonymous v. Arkwright (5 A D 2d 790) and Matter of Anonymous v. Arkwright (5 A D 2d 792, motion for leave to appeal denied in both proceedings 4 N Y. 2d 676) in that petitioner, prior to being called to testify, was informed that he was being called not merely as a witness but that he was being investigated and that sufficient evidence was already available to warrant presentation thereof to a Grand Jury or District Attorney. Determination unanimously confirmed, without costs. No opinion. Present — Nolan, P. J., Wenzel, Beldock, Ughetta and Hallinan, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

6 A.D.2d 719, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/anonymous-no-7-v-arkwright-nyappdiv-1958.