Irizarry v. Beltron

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Irizarry v. Beltron

6 A.D.3d 276, 774 N.Y.S.2d 694, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4636

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

DecidedApril 20, 2004

StatusPublished

This text of 6 A.D.3d 276 (Irizarry v. Beltron) 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

Irizarry v. Beltron, 6 A.D.3d 276, 774 N.Y.S.2d 694, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4636 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Family Court, Bronx County (Robert Mulroy, Support Mag.), entered on or about August 7, 2003, which, in a child support proceeding, denied nonparty appellants’ motion to [277]*277quash that part of the subject subpoena duces tecum demanding nonparty appellant Beltron Realty Corp.’s federal and state income tax returns for specified years, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Inasmuch as the extent of respondent’s income has been placed at issue in this child support proceeding and there are compelling grounds to believe that during the years in question respondent received substantial income from nonparty appellant Beltron Realty and its corporate predecessor for serving as a corporate officer and/or employee, the challenged portion of the subpoena duces tecum served by petitioner was properly upheld (see Anheuser-Busch Inc. v Abrams, 71 NY2d 327, 331-332 [1988]; Matter of Reuters Ltd. v Dow Jones Telerate, 231 AD2d 337, 341 [1997]). Concur—Tom, J.P., Saxe, Williams, Friedman and Marlow, JJ.

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

Order, Family Court, Bronx County (Robert Mulroy, Support Mag.), entered on or about August 7, 2003, which, in a child support proceeding, denied nonparty appellants’ motion to [277]*277quash that part of the subject subpoena duces tecum demanding nonparty appellant Beltron Realty Corp.’s federal and state income tax returns for specified years, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Inasmuch as the extent of respondent’s income has been placed at issue in this child support proceeding and there are compelling grounds to believe that during the years in question respondent received substantial income from nonparty appellant Beltron Realty and its corporate predecessor for serving as a corporate officer and/or employee, the challenged portion of the subpoena duces tecum served by petitioner was properly upheld (see Anheuser-Busch Inc. v Abrams, 71 NY2d 327, 331-332 [1988]; Matter of Reuters Ltd. v Dow Jones Telerate, 231 AD2d 337, 341 [1997]). Concur—Tom, J.P., Saxe, Williams, Friedman and Marlow, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

6 A.D.3d 276, 774 N.Y.S.2d 694, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4636, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/irizarry-v-beltron-nyappdiv-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack