Hynes v. Karten

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Hynes v. Karten

57 A.D.2d 822, 394 N.Y.S.2d 825, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12017

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

DecidedMay 31, 1977

StatusPublished

This text of 57 A.D.2d 822 (Hynes v. Karten) 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

Hynes v. Karten, 57 A.D.2d 822, 394 N.Y.S.2d 825, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12017 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1977).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County, entered on March 4, 1977, granting petitioner’s motion to compel compliance with two office subpoenas, unanimously modified, on the law, to the extent of sustaining the validity of the subpoenas but referring all questions which appellant may desire to raise in opposition to any item specified in the subpoenas, whether such opposition is based on relevancy or otherwise, to Justice McQuillan and otherwise affirmed, without costs and without disbursements. Under the Executive Order, pursuant to which the petitioner is acting, we take notice that it clothes him with the authority to conduct the instant investigation and to issue the challenged subpoenas. The appellant is directed to produce the [823]*823records listed in the subpoenas before Justice McQuillan, at which time the appellant may raise whatever questions or objections he may choose to raise, all of which will be passed upon by the Justice. Except as may be otherwise ordered by Justice McQuillan, all the records subpoened shall be delivered to petitioner. Settle order on notice. Concur — Murphy, P. J., Lupi.ano, Silverman and Capozzoli, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County, entered on March 4, 1977, granting petitioner’s motion to compel compliance with two office subpoenas, unanimously modified, on the law, to the extent of sustaining the validity of the subpoenas but referring all questions which appellant may desire to raise in opposition to any item specified in the subpoenas, whether such opposition is based on relevancy or otherwise, to Justice McQuillan and otherwise affirmed, without costs and without disbursements. Under the Executive Order, pursuant to which the petitioner is acting, we take notice that it clothes him with the authority to conduct the instant investigation and to issue the challenged subpoenas. The appellant is directed to produce the [823]*823records listed in the subpoenas before Justice McQuillan, at which time the appellant may raise whatever questions or objections he may choose to raise, all of which will be passed upon by the Justice. Except as may be otherwise ordered by Justice McQuillan, all the records subpoened shall be delivered to petitioner. Settle order on notice. Concur — Murphy, P. J., Lupi.ano, Silverman and Capozzoli, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

57 A.D.2d 822, 394 N.Y.S.2d 825, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12017, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hynes-v-karten-nyappdiv-1977.