Livingston v. State

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Livingston v. State

267 A.D.2d 972, 700 N.Y.S.2d 898, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13692

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

DecidedDecember 30, 1999

DocketClaim No. 94539

StatusPublished

This text of 267 A.D.2d 972 (Livingston v. State) 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

Livingston v. State, 267 A.D.2d 972, 700 N.Y.S.2d 898, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13692 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: The Court of Claims properly granted claimant’s motion seeking the issuance of subpoenas for four nonparty inmate witnesses in this action commenced by claimant against defendant, State of New York (State), and properly ordered claimant to pay the attendance fees and travel expenses pursuant to CPLR 8001. In opposing the motion, the State focused primarily on whether the witnesses were necessary and contended that three of the four subpoenas should not be issued. Although the State in addition contended that Civil Rights Law § 79 (3) (a) was applicable, the State further contended that it was premature to evaluate the burden that the subpoenas might impose on the State because it was not known where the inmates would be housed when the case was tried. Thus, contrary to the State’s contention on appeal, the court did not err in failing to address the application of the statute to claimant’s motion. (Appeal from Order of Court of Claims, NeMoyer, J. — Fees.) Present — Pine, J. P., Hayes, Pigott, Jr., Hurlbutt and Callahan, JJ.

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

—Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: The Court of Claims properly granted claimant’s motion seeking the issuance of subpoenas for four nonparty inmate witnesses in this action commenced by claimant against defendant, State of New York (State), and properly ordered claimant to pay the attendance fees and travel expenses pursuant to CPLR 8001. In opposing the motion, the State focused primarily on whether the witnesses were necessary and contended that three of the four subpoenas should not be issued. Although the State in addition contended that Civil Rights Law § 79 (3) (a) was applicable, the State further contended that it was premature to evaluate the burden that the subpoenas might impose on the State because it was not known where the inmates would be housed when the case was tried. Thus, contrary to the State’s contention on appeal, the court did not err in failing to address the application of the statute to claimant’s motion. (Appeal from Order of Court of Claims, NeMoyer, J. — Fees.) Present — Pine, J. P., Hayes, Pigott, Jr., Hurlbutt and Callahan, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

267 A.D.2d 972, 700 N.Y.S.2d 898, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13692, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/livingston-v-state-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack