In re Grand Jury Subpoenas Duces Tecum

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Grand Jury Subpoenas Duces Tecum

284 A.D.2d 534, 727 N.Y.S.2d 326, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6755

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

DecidedJune 25, 2001

StatusPublished

This text of 284 A.D.2d 534 (In re Grand Jury Subpoenas Duces Tecum) 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

In re Grand Jury Subpoenas Duces Tecum, 284 A.D.2d 534, 727 N.Y.S.2d 326, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6755 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

—In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR 2304 to quash four Grand Jury subpoenas duces tecum, the petitioners appeal, as limited by their brief, from stated portions of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (D’Emic, J.), dated April 10, 2000.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed as academic, without costs or disbursements.

On oral argument it was conceded that the Grand Jury had disbanded, rendering the subpoenas void. There is no basis to apply the exception to the mootness doctrine. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as academic. Altman, J. P., Krausman, McGinity and Cozier, JJ., concur.

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

—In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR 2304 to quash four Grand Jury subpoenas duces tecum, the petitioners appeal, as limited by their brief, from stated portions of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (D’Emic, J.), dated April 10, 2000.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed as academic, without costs or disbursements.

On oral argument it was conceded that the Grand Jury had disbanded, rendering the subpoenas void. There is no basis to apply the exception to the mootness doctrine. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as academic. Altman, J. P., Krausman, McGinity and Cozier, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

284 A.D.2d 534, 727 N.Y.S.2d 326, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6755, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-grand-jury-subpoenas-duces-tecum-nyappdiv-2001.