Leef v. Evers

88 Misc. 2d 178, 387 N.Y.S.2d 33, 1976 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2643
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York·Decided May 19, 1976·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

In the absence of an appropriate showing by plaintiff of the relevant surrounding circumstances including the efforts, if any, made to obtain the desired information by other means and the alternative unavailability of such information, it was an abuse of discretion to deny appellant’s application to quash the subpoena and to direct it to transmit the specified information.

Order entered February 27, 1975 (Egeth, J.) reversed and motion to quash subpoena granted, with $10 costs.

Concur: Markowitz, J. P., Hughes and Riccobono, JJ.

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

Leef v. Evers, 88 Misc. 2d 178, 387 N.Y.S.2d 33, 1976 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2643 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1976).

88 Misc. 2d 178 (Leef v. Evers) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Strecker v. Sarafian
153 Misc. 2d 959 (New York Supreme Court, 1992)
Holmes v. State
140 A.D.2d 854 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1988)
People v. J.K.
137 Misc. 2d 394 (New York County Courts, 1987)
People v. Private Sanitation Industry Ass'n of Nassau/Suffolk, Inc.
136 Misc. 2d 612 (New York County Courts, 1987)