Lefkowitz v. Leigh Realty Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Lefkowitz v. Leigh Realty Co.

54 A.D.2d 715, 387 N.Y.S.2d 465, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14312

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

DecidedOctober 12, 1976

StatusPublished

This text of 54 A.D.2d 715 (Lefkowitz v. Leigh Realty Co.) 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

Lefkowitz v. Leigh Realty Co., 54 A.D.2d 715, 387 N.Y.S.2d 465, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14312 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding to quash a nonjudicial subpoena, the appeal is from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated May 26, 1976, which denied the application. Order affirmed, with $50 costs and disbursements. The materials subpoenaed bear a reasonable relation to the subject matter under investigation and to the public purpose sought to be achieved thereby (see Matter of La Belle Creole Int., S. A. v Attorney-General of State of N. Y, 10 NY2d 192). Although it appears that the investigation was initiated by one complaint, the subsequent investigation by the Attorney-General’s office provided sufficient basis for the issuance of the subpoena (see Myerson v Lentini Bros. Moving & Stor. Co., 33 NY2d 250; Matter of Stevens Imports v Lack, 52 AD2d 928). Hopkins, Acting P. J., Martuscello, Margett, Rabin and Hawkins, JJ., concur.

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

In a proceeding to quash a nonjudicial subpoena, the appeal is from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated May 26, 1976, which denied the application. Order affirmed, with $50 costs and disbursements. The materials subpoenaed bear a reasonable relation to the subject matter under investigation and to the public purpose sought to be achieved thereby (see Matter of La Belle Creole Int., S. A. v Attorney-General of State of N. Y, 10 NY2d 192). Although it appears that the investigation was initiated by one complaint, the subsequent investigation by the Attorney-General’s office provided sufficient basis for the issuance of the subpoena (see Myerson v Lentini Bros. Moving & Stor. Co., 33 NY2d 250; Matter of Stevens Imports v Lack, 52 AD2d 928). Hopkins, Acting P. J., Martuscello, Margett, Rabin and Hawkins, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

54 A.D.2d 715, 387 N.Y.S.2d 465, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14312, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lefkowitz-v-leigh-realty-co-nyappdiv-1976.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack