Fahey v. Hynes
63 A.D.2d 1119, 406 N.Y.S.2d 712, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12228
Opinion
Order unanimously affirmed, without costs. (Matter of Hynes v Moskowitz, 44 NY2d 383; see, also, Shapiro v United States, 335 US 1, 32-35, reh den 335 US 836; Matter of Cappetta, 42 NY2d 1066, 1067; Matter of Sigety v Hynes sub nom. Kent Nursing Home v Office of Special State Prosecutor, 38 NY2d 260, 268, cert den 425 US 974.) (Appeal from order of Onondaga Supreme Court—quash subpoena.) Present—Cardamone, J. P., Simons, Hancock, Jr., Denman and Schnepp, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Fahey v. Hynes, 63 A.D.2d 1119, 406 N.Y.S.2d 712, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12228 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1978).
63 A.D.2d 1119 (Fahey v. Hynes) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Shapiro v. United States
335 U.S. 1 (Supreme Court, 1948)
Sigety v. Hynes
342 N.E.2d 518 (New York Court of Appeals, 1975)
In re Cappetta
369 N.E.2d 1172 (New York Court of Appeals, 1977)
Shapiro v. United States
335 U.S. 836 (Supreme Court, 1948)
Kent Nursing Home v. Office of Special State Prosecutor for Health & Social Services
425 U.S. 974 (Supreme Court, 1976)